Those who've sat down and talked to the current president, even some of his harshest critics, report back that he's a very intelligent man. His credentials are public record, and they clearly indicate to anyone who cares to seriously ask that Bush is at no loss for brains. Sure he's a poor public speaker, but then again the Slashdot crowd is probably the last people who should be judging someone on superficial qualities.
There are plenty of things you can criticize Bush over; being a moron is not one of them.
Kerry, on the other hand, has a public record that completely backs up your statement. Thumbs up on that one.
Any form of electronic record stored in RAM or on magnetic media can be tampered with.
If this was true financial institutions would have never computerized. It is not the easiest thing in the world to design tamperproof systems, but it's also not that difficult. Just because we haven't seen the companies present good, solid voting systems yet doesn't mean they're hard to make; it just means our elections commissioners aren't demanding such rigor.
My objection to paper ballots is that they're guaranteed to be inaccurate and generally a waste of time and effort. A properly implemented electronic voting system WILL be accurate, while the paper record won't. This has been shown over and over. There is an inherent inaccuracy to paper that just doesn't exist in the digital regime.
We will never know who won the poplar vote of the 2000 election specifically because of the inaccuracies of paper voting methods. Using paper to back up other methods does nothing to make the paper more accurate.
I have particular experience with the inaccuracy of Scantrons. Even if you have computers filling out the bubbles themselves they will be inaccurate to significant amounts in tight elections.
In short, using paper to backup or verify the digital results is like using a meter stick to verify a measurement previously taken in microns.
what happened in Florida was at least mitigated by the availability of some kind of paper trail for the votes
And we saw how great this paper trail worked out...
Anyone seeking to rely on a paper trail is just asking to be lied to. It is simply impossible to have an accurate paper trail. Paper just won't cut it. That's one of the major reasons we should go electronic.
(Sarcasm time)
Yeah, great, we have a list of votes that we can compare the results to! Fantastic! Let's just ignore that the list is completely untrustworthy and guaranteed to be wrong and keep on smiling! Aren't paper trails great?
I sure am glad we have them around to disagree with our precise electronic machines, otherwise we might get accurate counts!
What does a federal standard have to do with anything?
Our system is designed such that elections are carried out at the state level, so why would we want federal standards that would just as easily assure that everyone is equally broken?
That way, if there was any doubt about the result, the paper ballots could be recounted to verify the result was legitimate...yeah, that could be, if you ignore the years and years worth of evidence showing that paper ballots CANNOT be trusted themselves...
There are reasons we're moving away from paper. Including paper in the process of discarding it is just stupid.
You know, I've often looked at Australia as a potential future home; so much is screwed up here in the US and I just don't really want to deal with it anymore.
It's really sad to see Australia going the way of the United States. Are there no sane countries left on the planet?
No, we DON'T need paper trails or receipts or anything like that. There is absolutely no sense in using a backup that is guaranteed to be wrong.
No, there is NO problem with using a wireless network; if a vulnerablility is created just because it happens to be wireless then you have bigger problems to deal with.
All that is needed is a good implementation of public key and a very small amount of thought as to where an individual vote needs to be guaranteed accurate.
It's perfectly feasible to create an all electronic system that's perfectly accurate, nearly hackproof, massively verifyable, and almost instantly countable. It's a problem a high schooler could lay the foundation for.
So why are we wasting our time with the trash presented so far? Because the states haven't been asking the providers to go through the extra trouble. Let them take the easy way out and of course they will.
But get off this nonsense about paper trails, receipts, and outrage over wireless.
There are still problems and lack of voice and video chat (they are not even a part of the standard).
Well, no. This standard was to cover the core messaging platform, XMPP. It would have been inappropriate for voice or video to be included in the standard...
Slashdot Mirror
Just because it's not codified into law, anonymity is a right
Really?
Justify this statement, please.
It's probably seen in the public eye as destroying, if what you see in the news is any indication.
So basically you have two layers of distortion here: what people think about reality, and what the news indicates that they think about reality.
Ahh election years and the lies of sensationalists...
Those who've sat down and talked to the current president, even some of his harshest critics, report back that he's a very intelligent man. His credentials are public record, and they clearly indicate to anyone who cares to seriously ask that Bush is at no loss for brains. Sure he's a poor public speaker, but then again the Slashdot crowd is probably the last people who should be judging someone on superficial qualities.
There are plenty of things you can criticize Bush over; being a moron is not one of them.
Kerry, on the other hand, has a public record that completely backs up your statement. Thumbs up on that one.
:) See, now you've put him in an impossible position.
Anything he could possibly say to discredit Kerry (and boy is there a lot of it) you could label as a Bush campaign ad.
THe man's a two faced pretender. Nothing else to it.
Clinton's would be more appropriate...
Even worse then.
Now you add in subjectivity and somewhat arbitrary standards into the mix.
A mark on a piece of paper is always going to be questionable. A bit flipped is undeniably flipped.
That's incorrect.
There is inaccuracy between the paper and the reader without even considering the one placing the marks.
Assuming you didn't get a 1600, yes, there is a very real possibility.
Any form of electronic record stored in RAM or on magnetic media can be tampered with.
If this was true financial institutions would have never computerized. It is not the easiest thing in the world to design tamperproof systems, but it's also not that difficult. Just because we haven't seen the companies present good, solid voting systems yet doesn't mean they're hard to make; it just means our elections commissioners aren't demanding such rigor.
My objection to paper ballots is that they're guaranteed to be inaccurate and generally a waste of time and effort. A properly implemented electronic voting system WILL be accurate, while the paper record won't. This has been shown over and over. There is an inherent inaccuracy to paper that just doesn't exist in the digital regime.
We will never know who won the poplar vote of the 2000 election specifically because of the inaccuracies of paper voting methods. Using paper to back up other methods does nothing to make the paper more accurate.
I have particular experience with the inaccuracy of Scantrons. Even if you have computers filling out the bubbles themselves they will be inaccurate to significant amounts in tight elections.
In short, using paper to backup or verify the digital results is like using a meter stick to verify a measurement previously taken in microns.
what happened in Florida was at least mitigated by the availability of some kind of paper trail for the votes
And we saw how great this paper trail worked out...
Anyone seeking to rely on a paper trail is just asking to be lied to. It is simply impossible to have an accurate paper trail. Paper just won't cut it. That's one of the major reasons we should go electronic.
(Sarcasm time)
Yeah, great, we have a list of votes that we can compare the results to! Fantastic! Let's just ignore that the list is completely untrustworthy and guaranteed to be wrong and keep on smiling! Aren't paper trails great?
I sure am glad we have them around to disagree with our precise electronic machines, otherwise we might get accurate counts!
What does a federal standard have to do with anything?
Our system is designed such that elections are carried out at the state level, so why would we want federal standards that would just as easily assure that everyone is equally broken?
That way, if there was any doubt about the result, the paper ballots could be recounted to verify the result was legitimate ...yeah, that could be, if you ignore the years and years worth of evidence showing that paper ballots CANNOT be trusted themselves...
There are reasons we're moving away from paper. Including paper in the process of discarding it is just stupid.
And yet this still as nothing to do with Qualcomm...
You know, I've often looked at Australia as a potential future home; so much is screwed up here in the US and I just don't really want to deal with it anymore.
It's really sad to see Australia going the way of the United States. Are there no sane countries left on the planet?
Alarm?
What alarm?
This is a non-story.
If you like that channel you should go beat yourself repeatedly for keeping such trash on the air.
I kid!
Well, halfway...
TechTV is one of the worst channels on the air...
No, we DON'T need paper trails or receipts or anything like that. There is absolutely no sense in using a backup that is guaranteed to be wrong.
No, there is NO problem with using a wireless network; if a vulnerablility is created just because it happens to be wireless then you have bigger problems to deal with.
All that is needed is a good implementation of public key and a very small amount of thought as to where an individual vote needs to be guaranteed accurate.
It's perfectly feasible to create an all electronic system that's perfectly accurate, nearly hackproof, massively verifyable, and almost instantly countable. It's a problem a high schooler could lay the foundation for.
So why are we wasting our time with the trash presented so far? Because the states haven't been asking the providers to go through the extra trouble. Let them take the easy way out and of course they will.
But get off this nonsense about paper trails, receipts, and outrage over wireless.
There are still problems and lack of voice and video chat (they are not even a part of the standard).
Well, no.
This standard was to cover the core messaging platform, XMPP. It would have been inappropriate for voice or video to be included in the standard...
jabberd1.4.x sucks rocks.
Really? What problems have you had with it?
Oh yeah: point out a fact, be rated a troll.
Gotta love Slashdot...
The only way you can say the economy's going poorly based on Mr. Walmart there is if you are completely lacking in perspective.
Read the numbers. All economic indicators show that the economy is doing very, very well.
1) It's been going great for about two years now. Read the numbers.
2) No, I'm reading raw reports of the various organizations operating in and around Iraq.
3) Yeah.
It's already arguably paid for Iraq, after all.
The reconciled budget after consideration of the current economic status more than covers the cost of Iraq.
So yes, tax cuts arguably do pay for stuff like this.
Besides, it seems like a really bad time considering the economy + iraq + afghanistan.
even though the majority of informed individuals can see right through this, there's not a damn thing we can do.
Considering the first citation I believe your use of the word 'we' in the second might be a bit premature...
Economy's going great, Iraq's doing well, and Afghanistan was a success when seen with proper perspective.
Apples and oranges.
In 69 it was just a visit, now we have to pack to stay. Much more complicated.