But with your proposed solution what guarantees the electronic vote recorded will match your receipt? Will every voter then have to go to the counting place to check their receipt ID against the vote counted to make sure there was no fraud? It would otherwise be very easy to take your vote for A, print out a receipt for A, then record an electronic vote for B. Unless there was a way to match your receipt to the electronic vote, and someone bothered to do so, there is still nothing to prevent fraudulent recording of votes.
On the other hand if you have to turn in your receipt, and they are then used for recounts if an election is contested, that would provide a safeguard. However, you would essentially be returning to a paper ballot system, as I bet every electronic election result would be contested by the loser.
Or register hundred of dead people, or hundred of non-existent people, or simply have people vote under assumed names. Or contest ballots. Or send in invalid absentee ballots. Or... well, the list goes on and on.
Check out the history of any large US city, there is over a century of experience in quite easily manipulating elections using "fraud-resistant" paper ballots.
For all the talk of electronic voting fraud, it really seems a bit excesisve to me. Back in the "good old paper ballot" and "good old machine voting" days, my former home city managed to turn out over 100% of the vote, get the dead to vote (always for the same party, oddly enough, a very uniform voting block the recently decased are), and actually got one court ruling saying, in effect, "Yeah, there was fraud, but not enough to really matter." Voting fraud has always been with us and always will. Electronic voting changes the method, but really doesn't make it much easier. Why, many states consider it "oppressive" to require you to prove your identity. How hard is it to commit fraud when you just have to look at the list in front of the doddering old election observer and say "Uh, yeah, that's me... that name right there!"?
Lucky you! Last job I was on call every 5th week, for 7 days, 24 hours a day and got a page (to which I had 20 minutes to respond) every 15 minutes or less. Which is why it was my previous job. The pay was nowhere near enough to make up for losing 7 days of sleep.
And, as far as salary goes, funny how salaried US employees tend to work a lot of those 80 hour weeks, and very few of the 20 hour versions.
Not to be difficult but who is "England's famous Cyborg-scientist"? And why am I asking if he is "famous"?
Also, could we get even one reference for any of the more far-out claims? Direct interface to nerve endings? EKGs showing what is happening in my brain? (Ok, ok, you meant EEG, still a reference would be nice.) Eyeglass lasers? Yes, you may have seen people speculating about these things, but you speak as if they were everyday consumer goods. Could you please let me know where/when/by whom any or all of these were turned into even a functioning prototype?
Lastly, what do inmplanted RFID chips have to do with middle-mouse buttons?
And before someone brings up the argument "You forgot the 'are" between 'who' and 'exceptionally', you ain't got no grammer nohow neither so shut up!", I know that the word was omitted. It was not intentional.
fizzle bar to dog taco lick?
Couldn't understand that? Perhaps it is because it was gibberish. Perhaps had we agreed on some basic rules of communication it would have been intelligible. But then that would make us "grammar nazis" wouldn't it?
It drives me mad when people insist "don't need no grammer, us talk reel gud neway". Perhaps, for the moment. But without any rules for communication whatsoever we have no way to communicate at all
Worse still, the same people who whine about grammar (or often "grammer") nazis are the same people who exceptionally rigid about programming language syntax. (eg. A discussion in the recent past insisted.NET's C++ variant isn't reall C++ because it lacks features A, B, & C. [ I have forgotten the specifics at the moment.]) Why can they understand that computer programming requires an inflexible syntax, but think humans can communicate without any rules at all?
Not much of an economist are you? Putting more gold (money) into the economy causes prices to rise, making it less easy for casual players to buy expensive items. In additon, what exactly is bigoted about disliking gold farmers? Are you saying all gold farmers come from some subset of oppressed minorities? Is not that assumption the very bigotry of which you are accusing others?
Off topic, but doesn't your signature work out to 1 byte of ram? Assuming the ^ indicates an exponent. If it indicates XOR, then it would be zero bytes (100 XOR 1 = 101, 101 XOR 101 = 0) . Either way, is that what you intended?
I did the opposite. Went from writing apps (and 80+ hours weeks) to sysadmin spending 25% of my 40 hour week actually working. I think you moved in the wrong direction.
In the case of GNU it's not just C. Don't forget all the extensions added to gforth. Try taking gforth code and running it in another forth interpreter. Even after you load the dozen or so libraries of extensions.
If you're using ruby, C++ and Java, I think what the fourth language could bring would be "performance". Just a thought from a die-hard forth/assembly programmer.
The next realease of enlightenment deserves a spot of honor somewhere on the list. It seems to share DNF's release date of "when it's ready", though it has only been 3 years, not nearly 9.
You forgot the fact that slaves are low-productivity low-cost labor. From the point of view of the owner this is fine, as he garners almost all of their production as profit. However, from the point of view of the economy as a whole, it drives down overall productivity greatly. Also, by providing a pool of free labor it supresses overall wages greatly impoverishing the non-slave-owning citizens. In addition, by concentrating wealth in the hands of those most heavily invested in slavery it diverts capital into the purchase of slaves and away form other capital improvements which retards any attempts to mechanize, as it is still cheaper to buy slaves than buy machinery and pay the skilled workers needed to operate machines. And, lastly, slaves, being generally low productivity and not terribly motivated are generally unsuitable for any sort of skilled facotry work, so the slave economy tends to eschew any sort of industrializtion, focusing on agriculture.
Just a few thoughts, sorry for the disorderly presentation.
Actually, unfree status of varying sorts (slavery, serfdom, indentured servitude) was the norm for much of europe at the time of columbus and for a long time after. Admittedly, indentured servitude can be easily distinguished as having a terminal date, but serfdom and slavery differed only in serfs being tied to the land while slaves were tied to an owner. There was no lack of slavery in europe at the time of columbus.
Thanks for both replies. Then the -t- is akin to the transliteration ' in many languages for a stop, such as in b'milah or ha'aretz (though these examples have a weaker stop than that described for japanese). Sorry for all the hebrew refs, but the other languages I know lack hard stops (latin, classical greek, spanish, english).
Slashdot Mirror
But with your proposed solution what guarantees the electronic vote recorded will match your receipt?
Will every voter then have to go to the counting place to check their receipt ID against the vote counted to make sure there was no fraud? It would otherwise be very easy to take your vote for A, print out a receipt for A, then record an electronic vote for B. Unless there was a way to match your receipt to the electronic vote, and someone bothered to do so, there is still nothing to prevent fraudulent recording of votes.
On the other hand if you have to turn in your receipt, and they are then used for recounts if an election is contested, that would provide a safeguard. However, you would essentially be returning to a paper ballot system, as I bet every electronic election result would be contested by the loser.
Or register hundred of dead people, or hundred of non-existent people, or simply have people vote under assumed names. Or contest ballots. Or send in invalid absentee ballots. Or... well, the list goes on and on.
Check out the history of any large US city, there is over a century of experience in quite easily manipulating elections using "fraud-resistant" paper ballots.
For all the talk of electronic voting fraud, it really seems a bit excesisve to me.
Back in the "good old paper ballot" and "good old machine voting" days, my former home city managed to turn out over 100% of the vote, get the dead to vote (always for the same party, oddly enough, a very uniform voting block the recently decased are), and actually got one court ruling saying, in effect, "Yeah, there was fraud, but not enough to really matter."
Voting fraud has always been with us and always will. Electronic voting changes the method, but really doesn't make it much easier. Why, many states consider it "oppressive" to require you to prove your identity. How hard is it to commit fraud when you just have to look at the list in front of the doddering old election observer and say "Uh, yeah, that's me... that name right there!"?
So this is a patent for the pseudo-code: If(HTTP_REFERRER=...) THEN ...
ELSE ...
Wow! Innovation!
Lucky you! Last job I was on call every 5th week, for 7 days, 24 hours a day and got a page (to which I had 20 minutes to respond) every 15 minutes or less. Which is why it was my previous job. The pay was nowhere near enough to make up for losing 7 days of sleep.
And, as far as salary goes, funny how salaried US employees tend to work a lot of those 80 hour weeks, and very few of the 20 hour versions.
All these lists and not one contains top or netstat?
Not to be difficult but who is "England's famous Cyborg-scientist"? And why am I asking if he is "famous"?
Also, could we get even one reference for any of the more far-out claims? Direct interface to nerve endings? EKGs showing what is happening in my brain? (Ok, ok, you meant EEG, still a reference would be nice.) Eyeglass lasers? Yes, you may have seen people speculating about these things, but you speak as if they were everyday consumer goods. Could you please let me know where/when/by whom any or all of these were turned into even a functioning prototype?
Lastly, what do inmplanted RFID chips have to do with middle-mouse buttons?
And before someone brings up the argument "You forgot the 'are" between 'who' and 'exceptionally', you ain't got no grammer nohow neither so shut up!", I know that the word was omitted. It was not intentional.
fizzle bar to dog taco lick? .NET's C++ variant isn't reall C++ because it lacks features A, B, & C. [ I have forgotten the specifics at the moment.]) Why can they understand that computer programming requires an inflexible syntax, but think humans can communicate without any rules at all?
Couldn't understand that? Perhaps it is because it was gibberish. Perhaps had we agreed on some basic rules of communication it would have been intelligible. But then that would make us "grammar nazis" wouldn't it?
It drives me mad when people insist "don't need no grammer, us talk reel gud neway". Perhaps, for the moment. But without any rules for communication whatsoever we have no way to communicate at all
Worse still, the same people who whine about grammar (or often "grammer") nazis are the same people who exceptionally rigid about programming language syntax. (eg. A discussion in the recent past insisted
It makes your pompous, patronizing tone much less effective when you spell "grammar" as "grammer".
Not much of an economist are you? Putting more gold (money) into the economy causes prices to rise, making it less easy for casual players to buy expensive items. In additon, what exactly is bigoted about disliking gold farmers? Are you saying all gold farmers come from some subset of oppressed minorities? Is not that assumption the very bigotry of which you are accusing others?
Off topic, but doesn't your signature work out to 1 byte of ram? Assuming the ^ indicates an exponent.
If it indicates XOR, then it would be zero bytes (100 XOR 1 = 101, 101 XOR 101 = 0) .
Either way, is that what you intended?
I did the opposite. Went from writing apps (and 80+ hours weeks) to sysadmin spending 25% of my 40 hour week actually working. I think you moved in the wrong direction.
I never found a use for C++ at all. But that may just be me.
In the case of GNU it's not just C. Don't forget all the extensions added to gforth. Try taking gforth code and running it in another forth interpreter. Even after you load the dozen or so libraries of extensions.
By that logic, does the perl-to-C processor mean that perl is C too?
Me failing english? That's unpossible!
Battles over pants? I don't recall those from my history books.
If you're using ruby, C++ and Java, I think what the fourth language could bring would be "performance".
Just a thought from a die-hard forth/assembly programmer.
The next realease of enlightenment deserves a spot of honor somewhere on the list. It seems to share DNF's release date of "when it's ready", though it has only been 3 years, not nearly 9.
You forgot the fact that slaves are low-productivity low-cost labor. From the point of view of the owner this is fine, as he garners almost all of their production as profit. However, from the point of view of the economy as a whole, it drives down overall productivity greatly. Also, by providing a pool of free labor it supresses overall wages greatly impoverishing the non-slave-owning citizens. In addition, by concentrating wealth in the hands of those most heavily invested in slavery it diverts capital into the purchase of slaves and away form other capital improvements which retards any attempts to mechanize, as it is still cheaper to buy slaves than buy machinery and pay the skilled workers needed to operate machines. And, lastly, slaves, being generally low productivity and not terribly motivated are generally unsuitable for any sort of skilled facotry work, so the slave economy tends to eschew any sort of industrializtion, focusing on agriculture.
Just a few thoughts, sorry for the disorderly presentation.
Almost forgot, before you quibble with calling serfs slaves, one of the most likely etymologies for serf is from latin "servus" which means "slave".
Actually, unfree status of varying sorts (slavery, serfdom, indentured servitude) was the norm for much of europe at the time of columbus and for a long time after. Admittedly, indentured servitude can be easily distinguished as having a terminal date, but serfdom and slavery differed only in serfs being tied to the land while slaves were tied to an owner. There was no lack of slavery in europe at the time of columbus.
Thanks for both replies. Then the -t- is akin to the transliteration ' in many languages for a stop, such as in b'milah or ha'aretz (though these examples have a weaker stop than that described for japanese). Sorry for all the hebrew refs, but the other languages I know lack hard stops (latin, classical greek, spanish, english).
If I could type, that "ture" would read "true".