Don't hit me too hard for this one... since I'm stuck on Windows at the moment, I might as well mention that the 'Made for Windows $version' logo testing requires using Windows supplied colors. It's part of the accessibility requirements for instances where the user needs a high-contrast color scheme (iirc).
The only instance where I use hard coded colors? During the debug/testing phase (eg. a big bold green label who's text begins with "todo:")
...why not have dynamically created executable machine code delivered to the user? This should get rid of all of the annoyances of Flash and the limitations of JavaScript. You could write the code in any language. The code would be sent to the browser and would be executed in the same context as the user. You could, (but would not be required to), sign the code to make sure that it wasn't modified before you received it. Considering Macs are x86 now, you wouldn't have to worry about translating the code or alienating the users. Of course Linux users and other such double-plus-unconformists would be forced to reverse engineer it.
I think this is a great idea!!! I'll call up Microsoft! They could call it Web.Net ActiveX# 2.0!!!
{{{SMACK!!!}}} No! Bad brain! Bad...
(This is written as satire. Please don't hurt me.)
I posted something similar to this a while back but was ridiculed and someone said that the post should be considered satire. In a government where HAVA exists, punch card systems are no longer ideal. I submit to you, fellow/. readers, the improved, (probably) HAVA complaint, electronic punch card system, utilizing the best in custom hardware, paper trails, OCR, magnetic strips, and even barcodes. There's even a central database you can log into using a voter id number that lets you confirm your vote was recorded correctly which comes complete with a vote dispute/resolution system.
---Grammar Nazis Beware---
voter arrives at poll place receives magnetic card with one-way hash of voter id (mailed with sample ballot). user swipes card in cardreader at ballot box then enter's voter id sent to voter with sample ballot. this number is checked against card's hash this initiates the voting. touch screens or pushbuttons, etc no records are kept at all at the ballot box. Votes are immediatly printed twice via a standard receipt printer in human readable format. There is also an XML translation of the vote with a checksum at the bottom. A barcode uniquly identifies the vote. Another barcode contains the voter id. User retains one copy of the vote and submits the other copy. Both copies are identical and either (but only one) can be submitted. Submitted papar-vote's barcodes are scanned to make sure that this voter has only voted once. Voter is capable of making several paper ballots. All ballots would have same voter barcode, but different vote barcodes. Voter is only allowd to submit one ballot, even if several were made. As required by (many states') law, no verification of who the voter is is made. They present a voter id number and they receive the mag-card At poll close, ballots optically scanned as an image (not a fill-in-the-bubble scanner) The ballot is electronically recognized (OCRed) and the XML section is decoded. If the checksum matches, the ballot is electronically counted. If the checksum does not match, the ballot is rejected electronically and must be manually entered by unbiased election officials. Voters can log on to a centralized site and provide their voter id and vote number to verify that their vote was properly registered. (Again, no names) If not, voter the dispute the vote and provide a paper receipt as proof. County registrar can cross-reference voter id to name by subpeona only.
All paper ballots must uniquely identify the voter without revealing who the voter is (i.e. voter id sent by mail on sample ballot) All paper ballots must be individually uniquly identified in the event of a manual recount (random 4 digit number should be good enough) All ballots also contain a date and time of when the ballot is printed.
Manual recount: Because one voter can create multiple ballots (in case they change their mind, to prevent voter intimidation, etc). The ballots are uniquely identified. The voters are also uniquely identified (voter id). All ballots have two id barcodes on them. (Voter id, vote id)
If the results are disputed, the first step is an electronic recount. The next step is a manual recount. When fraud is charged such that the ballots in possession of the election officials cannot be trusted, the copies that the voters retains can be photocopied and mailed to the election officials. Only the copy of the ballot that was submitted at the polling place should be submitted because an electronic record of submitted ballots (identifying the voter id and the ballot id) exists and the ballots will be checked upon receipt. If the paper-vote that is mailed has a different vote id than the record of the vote id, the voter is notified and may (if needed) recast their ballot.
Voter responsibilities: It is the voter's responsibility to check the printed ballot against the vote they made on the ballot box. If they differ, they should try again
The theory here is that the code analysts are serious coders in their spare time and would consider VB beneath them. They might assume that such a developer might not be 'sophisticated' enough to provide a reliable back door. Hence, they'd only glance at the code.
The other option would be to code it in assembler or even machine code.
"I said I wanted to see the source code!!!" "That IS the source code!!!"
I'm sure the major companies (Google, Yahoo, AOL, etc) would love to air commercials like that. Considering this, why haven't they? The networks that would air said commercials are the same networks that are vehemently against net neutrality. I highly doubt that any network would air a commercial for something they are strongly against.
An interesting situation arises out of this, though... What about myspace? Something tells me that since Rupert Murdoc's News Corporation owns it, they may not have to pay any priority fees.
I prefer option D: Using the threat of PLAYING Kenny G music as a motivational tool towards anybody holding up the project. You could probably even get ol' Billy G to donate large amounts of cash towards this endevor.
Your best bet in that case is to dump that key as well as about 200 other similar keys over the side of a boat which is conveniently floating directly above the Mariana Trench in the Pacific Ocean.
I tried that same "let's boycott the entire industry" arguement once. Result? Some dick shooting down my dreams on/. with the proper use of logic: "See, your honor? All these people downloading music ARE hurting our sales."... "The court rules in favor of the plaintiff. Court is adjourned." New precident is set: Downloading an MP3 is now in the same class of felonies as punching somebody in the face [iirc, that is a felony, right?]. Why? It 'injures' the corporate entity. (Coporations have the same rights as a human for some reason.) That type of felony (iirc) is normally punishable by 3 - 5 years in prison and counts as a strike in California.
Now back to reality: Downloading can not be considered theft because you're simply not depriving the owner of their original work. They can still copy and distribute the work unhindered. Futher, you're not stealing profits because they haven't made those profits yet. Remember you haven't purchased the cd, therefore the money you would have paid for it is still yours. To further simplify: You can't steal something from me that wasn't mine to begin with.
Aren't most highschoolers under the age of consent in most areas? Those under the age of consent cannot be held to a contract. Then there's that whole federal court not upholding website click-through contracts... http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/06/02/00 23208
I only have one additional feature to your phone if I were to have it. Yes it does detract slightly from the absolute definition of minimalist (which, btw, would be to go WITHOUT a phone), but I still want to keep it within the realm of 'phone':
Don't eliminate the dial pad.
Why?
Say you get a voicemail: 'Dude, the server's down and it took the pbx with it. Call me at $some_other_number asap.'
A phone should always have all of the following features: Microphone (other party can hear you) Speaker (you can hear other party) Dial pad (you can call other party) Some means of answering the phone (duh) Some means of disconnecting (duh, possibly same button as above) Some indicator of an incoming call (audible/visual/tactile)
Additionally recommended features: Display (see who you're calling, what numbers you've entered, etc) Contact list (attach names to numbers) Clock (see what time/date it is [most commonly used non-network specific feature])
This is the phone I want to see listed as the $29.99 phone that comes free with either a prepaid account or most service plans.
You need sms? Call the service provided 800 number for that. You need a camera? Buy a camera. You need bluetooth? Why? Headset? Speaker has headphone jack. MP3? iPod. You need the most possible features to one-up your neighbor? Buy a Treo The trendiest phone? Buy a Razr. You need additional features later? You got it. The software is stored in a removable chip (similar in style to a SIM card).
Form factor similar to a pencil.
This phone features: Intuitive ring-o-buttons for your dialing pleasure (three rows of four buttons wrapped around the device, a small space at the end of each row for dialing without looking. Must be able to orient the device without looking [place the buttons near one end of the device]). B&W Micro lcd display along half the length for assistance with contact list, clock, numbers entered, etc. Single button for answer, hang up, power. Double click (press twice) the power button to lock/unlock all buttons (prevent accidental dialing. Speaker at top, mic at bottom. Headset jack on end near speaker, ballpoint insert at other end. 4-pin usb port for software update, backup number, programming, etc. Runs on 4 AAA batteries. Powers on/off in 3 seconds. Non-programmable ringer (generic, while still somewhat unique, single sine wave beeps). Ringer volume: On, Off (Vibrate can be separately turned on/off)
Hey, I'm not really stealing Windows. I only got it for free because I could. I wouldn't have otherwise paid for it. (I chose Windows before I learned about Linux... sorry.) Since profits off of my purchasing Windows don't exist and wouldn't have otherwise, I can't possibly be stealling the profits.
It would be pretty hard convince me that stealling something that doesn't exist (i.e. profits I would NOT have otherwise provided) is actually possible.
rnturn lists 6 Texas-based entities 1: G. W. Bush 2: Tom DeLay 3: Lamar 4: Cornin 5: Gonzales 6: Enron (Ken Lay)
member57 lists 5 Non-Texas-based entities 1: Robert Kennedy 2: Clinton 3: Pelosi 4: MCI Worldcom 5: TYCO
Based only on number of entities listed, rnturn has more items listed creating a valid 'better than even' situation.
Based on an average entities/state ratio, which I did not take the time to actually calculate, you'll notice that all entities listed by rnturn originate in Texas, wheras member57 lists entities which I assume are approximatly evenly distributed across the country.
Based on this analysis, rnturn's statement is valid and member57's reply, even though the number of entities listed is similar, should, nonetheless, take into account the density of entities as well as their location.
This statement was written by an unbiased, nonpartisan commentator. This statement favors rnturn's statement only on the merits of the argument and is not based on any political bias. Should anyone have reason to question the veracity, accuracy, or bias of this article, please reply to it before it is archived.
While valid, the particular argument will die the day that NON-TPM platforms are no longer made available or the day that the os requires the TPM to be present and enabled to run at all.
I can already see the day when PCs will have mod chips you can get for $25 from ebay. As in other systems, it may even be illegal to use said mod chip.
I have no use for a chip in my computer that can say 'no' to me when I (gasp) WANT to test a virus. (It's happened before on a secondary system I had when I was trying to figure out how to recover from said virus to help several clients of mine.)
I agree, however the HAVA act wants an electronic voting system. This system I wrote about, while still electronics as per the guidelines, is basically the electronic equivelent of the old style voting machines (which I think are much better anyways).
If all of the components can be created with open source software, all we have to do is get some really low end PCs running some lightweight OS on them (I imagine Windows 2000 PE with no networking, but that's just from lack of imagination), a bunch of thermal receipt printers and a whole shitload of rolls of paper for them, a bunch of magnetic card readers, and a bunch of blank cards.
Then several batch scanners (probably with parts from a handscanner) and write some software from parts picked from various open source software. (This includes the OCR part as well as the DB part).
I'm thinking the whole software side of it (batch scanner, ocr, ballot box) would have sourceforge pages and major survey companies could use the software for their own purposes as well.
Unfortunatly, this is not a satire, though I wish it was.
For privacy concerns, replace one-way hash of SSN with some other form of guaranteed unique number to prevent a voter from submitting duplicate votes.
Why, btw, would it be a violation of privacy if the agency running the poll place ALREADY has your SSN?
No photo ID required. You show up, state your name and address, they look it up and you sign it, as normal. They then hand you a mag-card with a unique number on it. It doesn't have to be based on the SSN. It's just that SSN happens to be a convienient unique number that already exists and that the poll place already has your name attached too.
Privacy concerns would occur if the voter sign-in book PRINTED the SSN. Identify the person on name and address instead. There aren't going to be two John P. Does living at 742 Evergreen Ter. Unless they are Sr. and Jr.
I wrote this all out in notepad without spell check of any kind. I barely even proofread it.
This is my idea of a reform: --- electronic balloting system:
user arrives at poll place receives magnetic card with one-way hash of ssn. user swipes card in cardreader at ballot box this initiates the voting. touch screens or pushbuttons, etc no records are kept at all at the ballot box. Votes are immediatly printed twice via a standard receipt printer in human readable format. There is also an XML translation of the vote with a checksum at the bottom. A barcode uniquly identifies the vote. Another barcode uniquely identifies the voter. (but not personnally identifiable) User retains one copy of the vote and submits the other copy. Both copies are identical and either (but only one) can be submitted. Submitted papar-vote's barcodes are scanned to make sure that this voter has only voted once. Voter is capable of making several paper ballots. All ballots would have same voter barcode, but different vote barcodes. Voter is only allowd to submit one ballot, even if several were made. At no point, other than receiving the voter mag-card is the voter identified by name or social security number. At poll close, ballot is optically scanned (the entire ballot, on a flatbed scanner). The ballot is electronically recognized (OCRed) and the XML section is decoded. If the checksum matches, the ballot is electronically counted. If the checksum does not match, the ballot is rejected electronically and must be manually entered by unbiased election officials.
All paper ballots must uniquely identify the voter without revealing who the voter is All paper ballots must be individually uniquly identified in the event of a manual recount All ballots also contain a date and time of when the ballot is printed.
Manual recount: Because one voter can create multiple ballots (in case they change their mind, to prevent voter intimidation, etc). The ballots are uniquely identified. The voters are also uniquely identified. All ballots have two id barcodes on them.
If the results are disputed, the first step is an electronic recount. The next step is a manual recount. When fraud is charged such that the ballots in possession of the election officials cannot be trusted, the copies that the voters retains can be photocopied and mailed to the election officials. Only the copy that was submitted at the polling place should be submitted because an electronic record of submitted ballots (identifying the voter id and the ballot id) exists and the ballots will be checked upon receipt. If the paper-vote that is mailed has a different vote id than the record of the vote id, the voter is notified and may (if needed) recast their ballot.
Voter responsibilities: It is the voter's responsibility to check the printed ballot against the vote they made on the ballot box. If they differ, they should try again, posibly with a different machine. It is also the voter's responsibility to make sure the ballot's barcodes are scanned when submitted and afterward inserted into the ballot bin that is eventually sent to election officials for certification.
Missing paper ballots: When ballots are submitted, the barcodes printed on them are scanned. This creates a record on an offsite database that contains ONLY the following information: The voter id, the ballot id (unique to voter, not globally unique), the date/time submitted (set by the offsite database), the polling place, and the station number. Each station is operated only by one worker per shift, the station must be logged into and out of by the worker.
(Based on a particular station) In the event of a missing ballot, the ballot is ignored. In the event of several missing ballots, the ballots are ignored and the poll worker responsible is fined. In the event of a large number of missing ballots, ALL voters at that particular polling place are asked to photocopy and mail in their cop
If I was the NSA/CIA/DIA, I wouldn't be transmitting sensitive signals via satellite at all, regardless of the ability of encryption or the requirement of encoding. Why? Believe it or not, just because there's a law against decrypting certain materials doesn't mean people won't. Sattelite and terrestrial broadcast communication are, in their very nature, probably the easiest methods of communication to intercept (aside from coded light flashes the Navy used to use or the Post.)
My previous post should not be construed to include stealing cable. I actually make a distinction. Believe it or not, climbing a telephone pole or digging up a wire, even on your own property can usually be considered tresspassing. Splitting a cable line without adding a powered signal booster decreases the signal strength to other customers in the area whereas recieving a sattelite or terrestrial EM signal only decreases the signal strength (afaik) in the shadow of the antenna. (I.E. the worst place to put a sattelite dish is directly behind another dish pointing at the same tranciever so that the sat is obscured.)
You can't steal something provided for free. In other words, they decided to broadcast into your backyard, if you manage to decode it, the onus is on the sat company to fix it, not you to NOT decode it.
The best analogy I can think of is that decoding a flashing light you can see from your back yard is stealing. (Yes I understand that technically speacking, sattelites don't communicate via a flashing light, but then again, if you think about the nature of electromagnetism...)
(5) the current version of the present can't be affected by future time travel. Each reverse travel creates a 'copy' of the current timeline and that is what is affected, with no possibility to restore the original. An example: I travel back in time and kill you. I then travel foreward to my time. During this foreward travel to my time, everything progresses outside the vehicle such as it would if some random guy appeared out of nowhere, killed you, then dissappeared. After arriving in my time, I realize the you shouldn't have been killed (for whatever reason). I travel back to the time I kill you just in time to prevent another instance of myself from killing you. In all instances, my own past has no intervention from the future. In other words, after all this, the timeline is rewritten 3 times. You could prevent the creation of the time machine altogether without negating the fact that you have one. This prevents all sorts of little paradoxes such as the grandfather paradox. It also produces another related theory of mine I'm calling "spontanious mater creation" which boils down to us being able to tell if this 'reality' is actually a 'secondary' timeline because of the spontanious creation of objects or devices that don't currently exist. (i.e. the appearance of a time machine from the future.)
Right now, I am really high. If I used my time machine to prevent myself from toking up, I'd still be high, and there'd be two of me when I return (I only went back because I was high. If I was sober, I wouldn't have.)
Slashdot Mirror
Don't hit me too hard for this one... since I'm stuck on Windows at the moment, I might as well mention that the 'Made for Windows $version' logo testing requires using Windows supplied colors. It's part of the accessibility requirements for instances where the user needs a high-contrast color scheme (iirc).
The only instance where I use hard coded colors? During the debug/testing phase (eg. a big bold green label who's text begins with "todo:")
...why not have dynamically created executable machine code delivered to the user? This should get rid of all of the annoyances of Flash and the limitations of JavaScript. You could write the code in any language. The code would be sent to the browser and would be executed in the same context as the user. You could, (but would not be required to), sign the code to make sure that it wasn't modified before you received it. Considering Macs are x86 now, you wouldn't have to worry about translating the code or alienating the users. Of course Linux users and other such double-plus-unconformists would be forced to reverse engineer it.
I think this is a great idea!!! I'll call up Microsoft! They could call it Web.Net ActiveX# 2.0!!!
{{{SMACK!!!}}} No! Bad brain! Bad...
(This is written as satire. Please don't hurt me.)
I got your system right here...
/. readers, the improved, (probably) HAVA complaint, electronic punch card system, utilizing the best in custom hardware, paper trails, OCR, magnetic strips, and even barcodes. There's even a central database you can log into using a voter id number that lets you confirm your vote was recorded correctly which comes complete with a vote dispute/resolution system.
I posted something similar to this a while back but was ridiculed and someone said that the post should be considered satire. In a government where HAVA exists, punch card systems are no longer ideal. I submit to you, fellow
---Grammar Nazis Beware---
voter arrives at poll place
receives magnetic card with one-way hash of voter id (mailed with sample ballot).
user swipes card in cardreader at ballot box then enter's voter id sent to voter with sample ballot. this number is checked against card's hash
this initiates the voting. touch screens or pushbuttons, etc
no records are kept at all at the ballot box.
Votes are immediatly printed twice via a standard receipt printer in human readable format.
There is also an XML translation of the vote with a checksum at the bottom.
A barcode uniquly identifies the vote.
Another barcode contains the voter id.
User retains one copy of the vote and submits the other copy.
Both copies are identical and either (but only one) can be submitted.
Submitted papar-vote's barcodes are scanned to make sure that this voter has only voted once.
Voter is capable of making several paper ballots. All ballots would have same voter barcode, but different vote barcodes.
Voter is only allowd to submit one ballot, even if several were made.
As required by (many states') law, no verification of who the voter is is made. They present a voter id number and they receive the mag-card
At poll close, ballots optically scanned as an image (not a fill-in-the-bubble scanner)
The ballot is electronically recognized (OCRed) and the XML section is decoded.
If the checksum matches, the ballot is electronically counted.
If the checksum does not match, the ballot is rejected electronically and must be manually entered by unbiased election officials.
Voters can log on to a centralized site and provide their voter id and vote number to verify that their vote was properly registered. (Again, no names) If not, voter the dispute the vote and provide a paper receipt as proof. County registrar can cross-reference voter id to name by subpeona only.
All paper ballots must uniquely identify the voter without revealing who the voter is (i.e. voter id sent by mail on sample ballot)
All paper ballots must be individually uniquly identified in the event of a manual recount (random 4 digit number should be good enough)
All ballots also contain a date and time of when the ballot is printed.
Manual recount:
Because one voter can create multiple ballots (in case they change their mind, to prevent voter intimidation, etc). The ballots are uniquely identified. The voters are also uniquely identified (voter id). All ballots have two id barcodes on them. (Voter id, vote id)
If the results are disputed, the first step is an electronic recount.
The next step is a manual recount.
When fraud is charged such that the ballots in possession of the election officials cannot be trusted, the copies that the voters retains can be photocopied and mailed to the election officials. Only the copy of the ballot that was submitted at the polling place should be submitted because an electronic record of submitted ballots (identifying the voter id and the ballot id) exists and the ballots will be checked upon receipt. If the paper-vote that is mailed has a different vote id than the record of the vote id, the voter is notified and may (if needed) recast their ballot.
Voter responsibilities:
It is the voter's responsibility to check the printed ballot against the vote they made on the ballot box. If they differ, they should try again
Visual Basic.
The theory here is that the code analysts are serious coders in their spare time and would consider VB beneath them. They might assume that such a developer might not be 'sophisticated' enough to provide a reliable back door. Hence, they'd only glance at the code.
The other option would be to code it in assembler or even machine code.
"I said I wanted to see the source code!!!"
"That IS the source code!!!"
I'm sure the major companies (Google, Yahoo, AOL, etc) would love to air commercials like that. Considering this, why haven't they? The networks that would air said commercials are the same networks that are vehemently against net neutrality. I highly doubt that any network would air a commercial for something they are strongly against.
An interesting situation arises out of this, though... What about myspace? Something tells me that since Rupert Murdoc's News Corporation owns it, they may not have to pay any priority fees.
I prefer option D: Using the threat of PLAYING Kenny G music as a motivational tool towards anybody holding up the project. You could probably even get ol' Billy G to donate large amounts of cash towards this endevor.
Your best bet in that case is to dump that key as well as about 200 other similar keys over the side of a boat which is conveniently floating directly above the Mariana Trench in the Pacific Ocean.
I tried that same "let's boycott the entire industry" arguement once. Result? Some dick shooting down my dreams on /. with the proper use of logic: "See, your honor? All these people downloading music ARE hurting our sales." ... "The court rules in favor of the plaintiff. Court is adjourned." New precident is set: Downloading an MP3 is now in the same class of felonies as punching somebody in the face [iirc, that is a felony, right?]. Why? It 'injures' the corporate entity. (Coporations have the same rights as a human for some reason.) That type of felony (iirc) is normally punishable by 3 - 5 years in prison and counts as a strike in California.
Now back to reality: Downloading can not be considered theft because you're simply not depriving the owner of their original work. They can still copy and distribute the work unhindered. Futher, you're not stealing profits because they haven't made those profits yet. Remember you haven't purchased the cd, therefore the money you would have paid for it is still yours. To further simplify: You can't steal something from me that wasn't mine to begin with.
Just make the damn thing reflective. Problem solved.
Aren't most highschoolers under the age of consent in most areas? Those under the age of consent cannot be held to a contract. Then there's that whole federal court not upholding website click-through contracts... http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/06/02/00 23208
I only have one additional feature to your phone if I were to have it. Yes it does detract slightly from the absolute definition of minimalist (which, btw, would be to go WITHOUT a phone), but I still want to keep it within the realm of 'phone':
Don't eliminate the dial pad.
Why?
Say you get a voicemail: 'Dude, the server's down and it took the pbx with it. Call me at $some_other_number asap.'
A phone should always have all of the following features:
Microphone (other party can hear you)
Speaker (you can hear other party)
Dial pad (you can call other party)
Some means of answering the phone (duh)
Some means of disconnecting (duh, possibly same button as above)
Some indicator of an incoming call (audible/visual/tactile)
Additionally recommended features:
Display (see who you're calling, what numbers you've entered, etc)
Contact list (attach names to numbers)
Clock (see what time/date it is [most commonly used non-network specific feature])
This is the phone I want to see listed as the $29.99 phone that comes free with either a prepaid account or most service plans.
You need sms? Call the service provided 800 number for that.
You need a camera? Buy a camera.
You need bluetooth? Why?
Headset? Speaker has headphone jack.
MP3? iPod.
You need the most possible features to one-up your neighbor? Buy a Treo
The trendiest phone? Buy a Razr.
You need additional features later? You got it. The software is stored in a removable chip (similar in style to a SIM card).
Form factor similar to a pencil.
This phone features:
Intuitive ring-o-buttons for your dialing pleasure (three rows of four buttons wrapped around the device, a small space at the end of each row for dialing without looking. Must be able to orient the device without looking [place the buttons near one end of the device]).
B&W Micro lcd display along half the length for assistance with contact list, clock, numbers entered, etc.
Single button for answer, hang up, power.
Double click (press twice) the power button to lock/unlock all buttons (prevent accidental dialing.
Speaker at top, mic at bottom. Headset jack on end near speaker, ballpoint insert at other end.
4-pin usb port for software update, backup number, programming, etc.
Runs on 4 AAA batteries.
Powers on/off in 3 seconds.
Non-programmable ringer (generic, while still somewhat unique, single sine wave beeps).
Ringer volume: On, Off (Vibrate can be separately turned on/off)
(AC 'cause I don't wanna incriminate myself)
Hey, I'm not really stealing Windows. I only got it for free because I could. I wouldn't have otherwise paid for it. (I chose Windows before I learned about Linux... sorry.) Since profits off of my purchasing Windows don't exist and wouldn't have otherwise, I can't possibly be stealling the profits.
It would be pretty hard convince me that stealling something that doesn't exist (i.e. profits I would NOT have otherwise provided) is actually possible.
I'm still waiting for THAT argument.
rnturn lists 6 Texas-based entities
1: G. W. Bush
2: Tom DeLay
3: Lamar
4: Cornin
5: Gonzales
6: Enron (Ken Lay)
member57 lists 5 Non-Texas-based entities
1: Robert Kennedy
2: Clinton
3: Pelosi
4: MCI Worldcom
5: TYCO
Based only on number of entities listed, rnturn has more items listed creating a valid 'better than even' situation.
Based on an average entities/state ratio, which I did not take the time to actually calculate, you'll notice that all entities listed by rnturn originate in Texas, wheras member57 lists entities which I assume are approximatly evenly distributed across the country.
Based on this analysis, rnturn's statement is valid and member57's reply, even though the number of entities listed is similar, should, nonetheless, take into account the density of entities as well as their location.
This statement was written by an unbiased, nonpartisan commentator. This statement favors rnturn's statement only on the merits of the argument and is not based on any political bias. Should anyone have reason to question the veracity, accuracy, or bias of this article, please reply to it before it is archived.
Yeah, votes run around $50,000 and up these days, depending on the representative(sic) in question...
While valid, the particular argument will die the day that NON-TPM platforms are no longer made available or the day that the os requires the TPM to be present and enabled to run at all.
I can already see the day when PCs will have mod chips you can get for $25 from ebay. As in other systems, it may even be illegal to use said mod chip.
I have no use for a chip in my computer that can say 'no' to me when I (gasp) WANT to test a virus. (It's happened before on a secondary system I had when I was trying to figure out how to recover from said virus to help several clients of mine.)
I agree, however the HAVA act wants an electronic voting system. This system I wrote about, while still electronics as per the guidelines, is basically the electronic equivelent of the old style voting machines (which I think are much better anyways).
If all of the components can be created with open source software, all we have to do is get some really low end PCs running some lightweight OS on them (I imagine Windows 2000 PE with no networking, but that's just from lack of imagination), a bunch of thermal receipt printers and a whole shitload of rolls of paper for them, a bunch of magnetic card readers, and a bunch of blank cards.
Then several batch scanners (probably with parts from a handscanner) and write some software from parts picked from various open source software. (This includes the OCR part as well as the DB part).
I'm thinking the whole software side of it (batch scanner, ocr, ballot box) would have sourceforge pages and major survey companies could use the software for their own purposes as well.
Unfortunatly, this is not a satire, though I wish it was.
For privacy concerns, replace one-way hash of SSN with some other form of guaranteed unique number to prevent a voter from submitting duplicate votes.
Why, btw, would it be a violation of privacy if the agency running the poll place ALREADY has your SSN?
No photo ID required. You show up, state your name and address, they look it up and you sign it, as normal. They then hand you a mag-card with a unique number on it. It doesn't have to be based on the SSN. It's just that SSN happens to be a convienient unique number that already exists and that the poll place already has your name attached too.
Privacy concerns would occur if the voter sign-in book PRINTED the SSN. Identify the person on name and address instead. There aren't going to be two John P. Does living at 742 Evergreen Ter. Unless they are Sr. and Jr.
I wrote this all out in notepad without spell check of any kind. I barely even proofread it.
This is my idea of a reform:
---
electronic balloting system:
user arrives at poll place
receives magnetic card with one-way hash of ssn.
user swipes card in cardreader at ballot box
this initiates the voting. touch screens or pushbuttons, etc
no records are kept at all at the ballot box.
Votes are immediatly printed twice via a standard receipt printer in human readable format.
There is also an XML translation of the vote with a checksum at the bottom.
A barcode uniquly identifies the vote.
Another barcode uniquely identifies the voter. (but not personnally identifiable)
User retains one copy of the vote and submits the other copy.
Both copies are identical and either (but only one) can be submitted.
Submitted papar-vote's barcodes are scanned to make sure that this voter has only voted once.
Voter is capable of making several paper ballots. All ballots would have same voter barcode, but different vote barcodes.
Voter is only allowd to submit one ballot, even if several were made.
At no point, other than receiving the voter mag-card is the voter identified by name or social security number.
At poll close, ballot is optically scanned (the entire ballot, on a flatbed scanner).
The ballot is electronically recognized (OCRed) and the XML section is decoded.
If the checksum matches, the ballot is electronically counted.
If the checksum does not match, the ballot is rejected electronically and must be manually entered by unbiased election officials.
All paper ballots must uniquely identify the voter without revealing who the voter is
All paper ballots must be individually uniquly identified in the event of a manual recount
All ballots also contain a date and time of when the ballot is printed.
Manual recount:
Because one voter can create multiple ballots (in case they change their mind, to prevent voter intimidation, etc). The ballots are uniquely identified. The voters are also uniquely identified. All ballots have two id barcodes on them.
If the results are disputed, the first step is an electronic recount.
The next step is a manual recount.
When fraud is charged such that the ballots in possession of the election officials cannot be trusted, the copies that the voters retains can be photocopied and mailed to the election officials. Only the copy that was submitted at the polling place should be submitted because an electronic record of submitted ballots (identifying the voter id and the ballot id) exists and the ballots will be checked upon receipt. If the paper-vote that is mailed has a different vote id than the record of the vote id, the voter is notified and may (if needed) recast their ballot.
Voter responsibilities:
It is the voter's responsibility to check the printed ballot against the vote they made on the ballot box. If they differ, they should try again, posibly with a different machine.
It is also the voter's responsibility to make sure the ballot's barcodes are scanned when submitted and afterward inserted into the ballot bin that is eventually sent to election officials for certification.
Missing paper ballots:
When ballots are submitted, the barcodes printed on them are scanned. This creates a record on an offsite database that contains ONLY the following information: The voter id, the ballot id (unique to voter, not globally unique), the date/time submitted (set by the offsite database), the polling place, and the station number. Each station is operated only by one worker per shift, the station must be logged into and out of by the worker.
(Based on a particular station)
In the event of a missing ballot, the ballot is ignored.
In the event of several missing ballots, the ballots are ignored and the poll worker responsible is fined.
In the event of a large number of missing ballots, ALL voters at that particular polling place are asked to photocopy and mail in their cop
Sounds suspiciously like one of the more gruesome plot devices from Tales From the Afternow (http://www.theafternow.com/)
guilty as charged
Beware the listings marked (+5, Funny). Trust me, you don't want to work there.
If I was the NSA/CIA/DIA, I wouldn't be transmitting sensitive signals via satellite at all, regardless of the ability of encryption or the requirement of encoding. Why? Believe it or not, just because there's a law against decrypting certain materials doesn't mean people won't. Sattelite and terrestrial broadcast communication are, in their very nature, probably the easiest methods of communication to intercept (aside from coded light flashes the Navy used to use or the Post.)
My previous post should not be construed to include stealing cable. I actually make a distinction. Believe it or not, climbing a telephone pole or digging up a wire, even on your own property can usually be considered tresspassing. Splitting a cable line without adding a powered signal booster decreases the signal strength to other customers in the area whereas recieving a sattelite or terrestrial EM signal only decreases the signal strength (afaik) in the shadow of the antenna. (I.E. the worst place to put a sattelite dish is directly behind another dish pointing at the same tranciever so that the sat is obscured.)
You can't steal something provided for free. In other words, they decided to broadcast into your backyard, if you manage to decode it, the onus is on the sat company to fix it, not you to NOT decode it.
The best analogy I can think of is that decoding a flashing light you can see from your back yard is stealing. (Yes I understand that technically speacking, sattelites don't communicate via a flashing light, but then again, if you think about the nature of electromagnetism...)
(5) the current version of the present can't be affected by future time travel. Each reverse travel creates a 'copy' of the current timeline and that is what is affected, with no possibility to restore the original. An example: I travel back in time and kill you. I then travel foreward to my time. During this foreward travel to my time, everything progresses outside the vehicle such as it would if some random guy appeared out of nowhere, killed you, then dissappeared. After arriving in my time, I realize the you shouldn't have been killed (for whatever reason). I travel back to the time I kill you just in time to prevent another instance of myself from killing you. In all instances, my own past has no intervention from the future. In other words, after all this, the timeline is rewritten 3 times. You could prevent the creation of the time machine altogether without negating the fact that you have one. This prevents all sorts of little paradoxes such as the grandfather paradox. It also produces another related theory of mine I'm calling "spontanious mater creation" which boils down to us being able to tell if this 'reality' is actually a 'secondary' timeline because of the spontanious creation of objects or devices that don't currently exist. (i.e. the appearance of a time machine from the future.)
Right now, I am really high. If I used my time machine to prevent myself from toking up, I'd still be high, and there'd be two of me when I return (I only went back because I was high. If I was sober, I wouldn't have.)