I read something a day or two ago that said that the leaker only leaked stuff that was already something that was either announced or going to be announced publicly. I dont have a URL, unfortunately.
There are allegations that some find credible. These allegations dont get investigated, which would be a requirement to produce evidence. In the days before everything broke open in watergate, Nixon didnt do watergate, "because we have no evidence". Before the investigations into the Clinton affair, he didnt do it, "because we have no evidence". Paula Jones was just an allegation, Monica's dress was just an allegation. Because there was no evidence. So, before the investigations, there was no evidence. So, there should be no investigation.
On this, I can go mark every bug in bug tracking as "no problem found". I didnt look, therefore I did not see, therefore there is no problem.
The lack of evidence is not incredible, since, as far as I can tell, none of the allegations have lead to investigations.
And this is the problem, things suit you now, if there was a problem, it was in your favor. What will you do when the problem( if there is problem ) does not suit you? It's a pendulum, and it swings.
OK, it went to the supreme court. My point was that they could have kept going from there, with more suits, and more importantly, like in the recent Mexican elections.
Did both sides try to fix? Perhaps. It is not right to rig an election no matter the side. Allegations about any misdeeds sbould be investigated.
I agree that both parties have left people behind, and the balance of your post from there. Interesting observations.
Evidence? Perhaps I missed it, what evidence is there that there is no possiblity of problems? Mind you, for every blog you can reference that alleges that all is in order, I can probably find another blog that alleges problems.
All my reading leads me to believe that there is an uninvestigated possiblity.
Why can election personel take home the voting machines, but black box voting cant get within 10 feet of one? Do you know of repudiation ( outside Diebold press releases ) that the machines can be tampered with in a matter of minutes, in a way that leaves the all the tamper evident seals undisturbed?
Doesnt proving something usually start with an allegation of wrongdoing, then move to proving it? How can this be proved if, because there is no proof ( as yet ), nothing to prove the allegations is ever allowed to be developed?
How about the Brian Bilbray thing? Case shut down because the house swore him in before the count was official? Why the rush? Machines going home for overnights when it has been shown that the machines are vulnerable to undiscovered tampering.
If the "last two" ( Gore and Kerry, I presume? ) really didnt care, they could have taken things much much further, methinks. Yes, they did ask for a recount. Was that wrong? If "your" candidate's campaign was in a similiar situation, would you not expect them to do the same? ( I note that I am presuming who "your" candidate was... am I wrong? )
And so, this is no different than other elections. Fine and good. Should it be accepted on that basis? Hell no. Not from anyone, not benefitting anyone. We ought to be getting closer to a perfectly representative and fair set of elections, not maintaining the status quo. I dont want either party winning or losing due to fraud.
Well, we have a set of companies that provide rioting services to you, or your organization. We are nationwide, working on some international points of presence, we provide the finest in uncomfortable and unsafe riots. We have a whole range of services, from local store picketing and firebombing, all the way up to revolting against and even overthrowing your goverment. We have all the needed equipment
Visit us at our website, www.international_riots.com
Note, prefer. I did not say that there is an absolute selection. I also did not say that capitalism is broken beyond redemption, that we should replace it. Yes, you can find your examples. I can find mine. Why are there so many of my examples, though? Yes, absolutely, the totalitarian dictatorships calling themselves communism where really really bad. Yes, abolutely, Marx's idea of communism does not work. I have already said that capitalism is the best economic system we have found so far. Yes, other systems have a problem with this as well. It is still a flaw.
Why is it that I have a bias against for pointing out a flaw? Do you have a bias? Can I assume that you are biased for capitalism?
I have no doubt that Ms Dunn has character issues.
And she owns that.
Capitalism has a flaw in that it "prefers" ( as an emergent behaviour ) people without character for high positions like this. Because those people will do whatever it takes, regardless of of ethics or legality, and that makes more money.
If you cant look at a thing and see the bad and the good, then what? Is he prejudiced because he sees flaws in a thing? There are flaws in capitalism. It is the best thing we have found so far, but there are flaws in it.
Slashdot Mirror
You give me such a haderach.
Do you have an aspirin?
Would that make him a "Bene-factor"?
I read something a day or two ago that said that
the leaker only leaked stuff that was already
something that was either announced or going to
be announced publicly. I dont have a URL, unfortunately.
There are allegations that some find credible. These allegations
dont get investigated, which would be a requirement to produce
evidence. In the days before everything broke open in watergate,
Nixon didnt do watergate, "because we have no evidence". Before
the investigations into the Clinton affair, he didnt do it,
"because we have no evidence". Paula Jones was just an allegation,
Monica's dress was just an allegation. Because there was no
evidence. So, before the investigations, there was no evidence.
So, there should be no investigation.
Simple logic indeed.
And that is another thing.
The burden of proof needs to be on the system.
If the system cannot be shown as correct, then,
why should it be trusted?
That is not evidence. That is a lack of evidence.
On this, I can go mark every bug in bug tracking as
"no problem found". I didnt look, therefore I did not
see, therefore there is no problem.
The lack of evidence is not incredible, since, as far as
I can tell, none of the allegations have lead to
investigations.
And this is the problem, things suit you now, if there
was a problem, it was in your favor. What will you
do when the problem( if there is problem ) does not suit you?
It's a pendulum, and it swings.
OK, it went to the supreme court. My point was that they could have kept
going from there, with more suits, and more importantly, like in the recent
Mexican elections.
Did both sides try to fix? Perhaps. It is not right to rig an election
no matter the side. Allegations about any misdeeds sbould be investigated.
I agree that both parties have left people behind, and the balance of your
post from there. Interesting observations.
Evidence? Perhaps I missed it, what evidence is there
that there is no possiblity of problems? Mind you,
for every blog you can reference that alleges that all
is in order, I can probably find another blog that
alleges problems.
All my reading leads me to believe that there is an
uninvestigated possiblity.
Why can election personel take home the voting machines,
but black box voting cant get within 10 feet of one? Do
you know of repudiation ( outside Diebold press releases )
that the machines can be tampered with in a matter of minutes,
in a way that leaves the all the tamper evident seals
undisturbed?
Doesnt proving something usually start with an allegation of
wrongdoing, then move to proving it? How can this be proved
if, because there is no proof ( as yet ), nothing to prove the
allegations is ever allowed to be developed?
How about the Brian Bilbray thing? Case shut down because the
house swore him in before the count was official? Why the rush?
Machines going home for overnights when it has been shown that
the machines are vulnerable to undiscovered tampering.
If the "last two" ( Gore and Kerry, I presume? ) really didnt care,
they could have taken things much much further, methinks. Yes,
they did ask for a recount. Was that wrong? If "your" candidate's
campaign was in a similiar situation, would you not expect them
to do the same? ( I note that I am presuming who "your" candidate
was... am I wrong? )
And so, this is no different than other elections. Fine and good.
Should it be accepted on that basis? Hell no. Not from anyone,
not benefitting anyone. We ought to be getting closer to a
perfectly representative and fair set of elections, not maintaining
the status quo. I dont want either party winning or losing due
to fraud.
PTL;DR
Better than having your money taken, eh?
Except for today, I see.
Havent yet not cant.
And wouldnt it be appropriate to concentrate first on
the browsers the largest number of users use?
Closed ranks, not allowing volunteers, top down
administration.
I dunno, we keep trying at it, we are bound to
figure it out. Within a thousand riots or so,
I expect.
Shh... You are forbidden from noticing that.
That is not the website you are looking for.
Well, we have a set of companies that provide rioting services to you,
or your organization. We are nationwide, working on some international
points of presence, we provide the finest in uncomfortable and unsafe
riots. We have a whole range of services, from local store picketing
and firebombing, all the way up to revolting against and even overthrowing
your goverment. We have all the needed equipment
Visit us at our website, www.international_riots.com
We're revolting!
Note, prefer. I did not say that there is an absolute selection.
I also did not say that capitalism is broken beyond redemption, that
we should replace it. Yes, you can find your examples. I can find
mine. Why are there so many of my examples, though? Yes, absolutely,
the totalitarian dictatorships calling themselves communism where
really really bad. Yes, abolutely, Marx's idea of communism does not
work. I have already said that capitalism is the best economic
system we have found so far. Yes, other systems have a problem with
this as well. It is still a flaw.
Why is it that I have a bias against for pointing out a flaw?
Do you have a bias? Can I assume that you are biased for capitalism?
Check your wallet. Back pocket?
Your other suit?
I prefer proprietary rioting. Better quality control.
I have no doubt that Ms Dunn has character issues.
And she owns that.
Capitalism has a flaw in that it "prefers" ( as an
emergent behaviour ) people without character for high
positions like this. Because those people will do
whatever it takes, regardless of of ethics or legality,
and that makes more money.
It's not about stock price, it is about oversight and ethics.
If you cant look at a thing and see the bad and the good,
then what? Is he prejudiced because he sees flaws
in a thing? There are flaws in capitalism. It is the best
thing we have found so far, but there are flaws in it.
But you know, the growth of this new technology could be explosive.
If the people educated by governments where so in lockstep
with that education, then why would the Chinese govt be
worried about Wikipedia?