Then how do you know how it was counted? Whether it was counted isn't the question. But verifying that it was counted as intended was the question. Also, if you don't have to match a vote to a person, then you will move ballot stuffing to chain stuffing, and not change the largest single fraud in voting.
It's still possible. Go to precincts that vote heavily one way (or the other). Shoot everyone there. Done. You don't need 100% accuracy to skew elections. And the point that "if you vote against me, you'll die, your neighbors will die, your family will die" will be made.
It amazes me the people who prefer ballot stuffing to open voting. There can be no ballot stuffing in open ballots. But that infringes on our God given right to rig elections.
The US was open voting for the first 100 or so years. It wasn't until open civil war when the system didn't work as well. It worked much much better than we have today. A full electoral roll with every vote published along side it for all to see in plain text would be a better system than we have now. But we can do much better than that as well.
Perhaps knowing everyone will know your vote would shame some voters into being educated. One can hope.
There have been studies shown where people prefer fixed prices. That way they "know" that they are getting the best deal. And because how we are more risk averse than reward focused, we'd rather pay 10% more and guarantee that we got the "best deal" than save that 10% and forever think someone else got 5% better than we did.
There's a reason why the least satisfying part of car ownership is the purchase.
Is that the reason? I've been to many places without car dealers. If that's why the laws are there, they should be repealed, because they aren't working.
What do "lots full of cars" have to do with it? You do realize that in most cases, the dealerships don't own the cars on their lots. The lease them from the maker (reduces the capital needed to start a dealership, and gives makers a base income, even if cars aren't selling).
If the dealerships have exclusivity in their contracts (some do, some don't), then they could claim a breach of contract by the makers, and notify the makers to pick up their cars at their expense, and possibly even charge the makers for storage until the makers pick up the cars from the dealers.
Yes, the dealers would be hurt, but the maker would be hurt even more.
I just think that it is completely impractical for consumer use.
I said that it would be easy for the government to require it, and then have the manufacturers support it. It takes almost nothing (if not nothing) in the hardware to support it, just changes to the way the (already existent) identification to the OS is applied to the hardware. The *only* one I said would use it initially would be the government. And that everyone who sells to the government would sell the same stuff to the people, who could use or not use the "extra" feature, with no down sides.
I never said that consumer use would take advantage of any or all of the feature uplift, just that they "could".
You are being too cute and cryptic for me. I didn't see the Jewish section of the German army. And are you saying that the Jews took down the World Trade Center?
That's why the US tried revisionist history to call them internment camps and such, but my dad was 16 when WWII ended. They were "concentration camps". But we "knew" they weren't killing people in them Did the Germans not know anything about the conditions in their camps? 3,000,000 enter. 0 leave. The math doesn't add up.
I don't disagree it would be hard to do right. I do disagree it's impossible. Logitech supplies a list of serials in the shipment, and they are entered on the list. You can even lock it down as much as to have windows for the "first install" of the device, and the serials allowed. You could lock it down more or less, as you see fit.
Yes, it is. When you sign up, you sign up for what they stand for. If they were saying "Jews at great" while secretly gassing them, that'd be one thing, but there was no secret that people were being rounded up for concentration camps. Anyone who knew that and signed up was complicit. Much like all the people who voted for Bush are complicit in all the acts he did. It's not like it was a secret who he was, and what he advocated. And he won. Twice. If Bush were hanged for treason, so should all the people who put him there.
I thought the attacks were a show of power. Reality proves you wrong. And what about Jews? Still on about how they run the planet through the Illuminati? You do know the Pope is Jewish, and the head of the Illuminati.
Now if we can just get rid of the anti-stereotype politically correct ads that show men are always the helpless dummies and women are always coming to the rescue... these are just as corrosive as the previous generation ads where women were dumb blondes and men ruled the roost.
There is humour in playing on the stereotypes. That's why there are so many cop babysitting movies. Kindergarten Cop, The Pacifier, and others. It's funny to put someone in the situation opposite of their stereotype.
You can't eliminate stereotypes. They are genetically wired into every animal. We place things into categories. "safe" "not safe" and many others. Doing so is a requirement of survival. Fighting stereotypes is literally fighting our humanity.
Men aren't even allowed to do that with their sons, and sons are discouraged doing that with their dads. A man who is nice to boys, must be a pedophile. We don't even need to say "gay pedophile" because the "gay" is assumed, thanks to Catholics. I'm constantly "inappropriate" with a child that I have no legal or blood relation to. I married his mum before he was 1. I treat him no differently than his brother who I do share genetics with. But someone could easily portray it as inappropriate.
We look long and hard for things to be offended by.
Force and fraud are common within capitalism. Fascism is capitalism by force. Fraud isn't "force", it's lying. The problem is that, especially in Slashdot, with all the libertarians, you have the right to say anything you want without restriction or responsibility. Harming others with speech is your God given right.
You might think there is a trivial solution to these problems, but which seems more likely to you?
Yes. Trivial. The reason I said "encryption" in the first place is that most of these would be going on Windows computers. Windows servers come with CA included. So it's trivial to authorize every device. Now, identifying all of them individually and ensuring no duplication would require an authentication step that doesn't exist today. But it's still trivial.
Either you're right and I'm wrong and there is an easy way to secure USB peripherals and collectively every IT organization on the planet is just too lazy to implement it,
You are asking the wrong question. It's impossible to secure USB today. It's trivial to do it if you wanted to (and had the hardware makers on board). And if the US governemnt said "if you don't do it, we'll never buy another of your devices, and make sure any grants to organizations will never be used to buy your stuff" you'd have 10 or so makers fight to get in on the program (at zero hardware cost to the government). After that it'd be free and trivial for IT departments to secure USB (while still generally allowing it).
The system must uniquely identify all USB devices. Just passing a UID would be sufficient to identify every USB device separately, but would run into the problem of trivial cloning.
Certificates are a white list. My computer knows *every* valid certificate. It may not store the necessary answer to all locally, but will go up the cert chain, which is an explicit white list. There is no "allowed" certificate that isn't recorded right not, explicitly. And for millions of unique sites. So the scale isn't an issue. We do more complex today.
Only governments have the kinds of money to throw at this problem that you'd need,
It's not the amount of money, but the willingless to spend it. Securing USB for all is a noble goal. Once the government is on board, then private IT can decide if it's worthy, and if so, adopt it for trivial cost. They are already running a CA server (in their Windows server), even if they just have that functionality turned off. The cost is to the hardware makers. And if they willingly accept the cost as a cost of doing business with the government, then everyone can benefit from it.
I have an i7-3612QM in my laptop. I don't try to go long periods away from power. But it's really nice to play casual games at desktop performance. And the cores do make a difference when having lots of things open, taking up background processing while doing something like a game, or doing something while playing a video out of the HDMI to a second monitor.
Speaking of which, I need to look up how I can send audio from one program out the HDMI while sending the audio from everything else out the laptop speakers. Because it's not too unusual for me to play a video via VLC for the kids, while doing something else, though never tried playing a game fullscreen on the laptop screen while playing a video in HD on the HDMI.
I don't claim to be a regular user. But I claim to actually use it that way.
Why replace it. Nearly all will accept inputs. I can play any MP3 player through my car radio, without modification. Aux-in and USB ports are common, even in factory radios these days.
Slashdot Mirror
Then how do you know how it was counted? Whether it was counted isn't the question. But verifying that it was counted as intended was the question. Also, if you don't have to match a vote to a person, then you will move ballot stuffing to chain stuffing, and not change the largest single fraud in voting.
It's still possible. Go to precincts that vote heavily one way (or the other). Shoot everyone there. Done. You don't need 100% accuracy to skew elections. And the point that "if you vote against me, you'll die, your neighbors will die, your family will die" will be made.
It amazes me the people who prefer ballot stuffing to open voting. There can be no ballot stuffing in open ballots. But that infringes on our God given right to rig elections.
The US was open voting for the first 100 or so years. It wasn't until open civil war when the system didn't work as well. It worked much much better than we have today. A full electoral roll with every vote published along side it for all to see in plain text would be a better system than we have now. But we can do much better than that as well.
Perhaps knowing everyone will know your vote would shame some voters into being educated. One can hope.
There have been studies shown where people prefer fixed prices. That way they "know" that they are getting the best deal. And because how we are more risk averse than reward focused, we'd rather pay 10% more and guarantee that we got the "best deal" than save that 10% and forever think someone else got 5% better than we did.
There's a reason why the least satisfying part of car ownership is the purchase.
It means "smaller than GM".
The state where the vehicle is used, same as every regular dealership.
Is that the reason? I've been to many places without car dealers. If that's why the laws are there, they should be repealed, because they aren't working.
And if the answer is "yes" does that matter?
What do "lots full of cars" have to do with it? You do realize that in most cases, the dealerships don't own the cars on their lots. The lease them from the maker (reduces the capital needed to start a dealership, and gives makers a base income, even if cars aren't selling).
If the dealerships have exclusivity in their contracts (some do, some don't), then they could claim a breach of contract by the makers, and notify the makers to pick up their cars at their expense, and possibly even charge the makers for storage until the makers pick up the cars from the dealers.
Yes, the dealers would be hurt, but the maker would be hurt even more.
I just think that it is completely impractical for consumer use.
I said that it would be easy for the government to require it, and then have the manufacturers support it. It takes almost nothing (if not nothing) in the hardware to support it, just changes to the way the (already existent) identification to the OS is applied to the hardware. The *only* one I said would use it initially would be the government. And that everyone who sells to the government would sell the same stuff to the people, who could use or not use the "extra" feature, with no down sides.
I never said that consumer use would take advantage of any or all of the feature uplift, just that they "could".
In most cases, you can't get it without the audio package. Even on special order.
Most of the US ones are single (or family) brand only, but there are still plenty that are multi-brand. http://www.johneagle.com/index... http://www.dondavisautogroup.c... Just some ones I remember growing up.
You are being too cute and cryptic for me. I didn't see the Jewish section of the German army. And are you saying that the Jews took down the World Trade Center?
That's why the US tried revisionist history to call them internment camps and such, but my dad was 16 when WWII ended. They were "concentration camps". But we "knew" they weren't killing people in them Did the Germans not know anything about the conditions in their camps? 3,000,000 enter. 0 leave. The math doesn't add up.
Conservatives have made it clear that they have no interest in spending money to fix other people's problems.
So when they deny it, they are lying and really mean "I belive in AGW, but believe we don't need to do anything about it."?
I don't disagree it would be hard to do right. I do disagree it's impossible. Logitech supplies a list of serials in the shipment, and they are entered on the list. You can even lock it down as much as to have windows for the "first install" of the device, and the serials allowed. You could lock it down more or less, as you see fit.
Yes, it is. When you sign up, you sign up for what they stand for. If they were saying "Jews at great" while secretly gassing them, that'd be one thing, but there was no secret that people were being rounded up for concentration camps. Anyone who knew that and signed up was complicit. Much like all the people who voted for Bush are complicit in all the acts he did. It's not like it was a secret who he was, and what he advocated. And he won. Twice. If Bush were hanged for treason, so should all the people who put him there.
I thought the attacks were a show of power. Reality proves you wrong. And what about Jews? Still on about how they run the planet through the Illuminati? You do know the Pope is Jewish, and the head of the Illuminati.
Now if we can just get rid of the anti-stereotype politically correct ads that show men are always the helpless dummies and women are always coming to the rescue ... these are just as corrosive as the previous generation ads where women were dumb blondes and men ruled the roost.
There is humour in playing on the stereotypes. That's why there are so many cop babysitting movies. Kindergarten Cop, The Pacifier, and others. It's funny to put someone in the situation opposite of their stereotype.
You can't eliminate stereotypes. They are genetically wired into every animal. We place things into categories. "safe" "not safe" and many others. Doing so is a requirement of survival. Fighting stereotypes is literally fighting our humanity.
Men aren't even allowed to do that with their sons, and sons are discouraged doing that with their dads. A man who is nice to boys, must be a pedophile. We don't even need to say "gay pedophile" because the "gay" is assumed, thanks to Catholics. I'm constantly "inappropriate" with a child that I have no legal or blood relation to. I married his mum before he was 1. I treat him no differently than his brother who I do share genetics with. But someone could easily portray it as inappropriate.
We look long and hard for things to be offended by.
Force and fraud are common within capitalism. Fascism is capitalism by force. Fraud isn't "force", it's lying. The problem is that, especially in Slashdot, with all the libertarians, you have the right to say anything you want without restriction or responsibility. Harming others with speech is your God given right.
Are you uniquely whitelisting devices or not?
Yes.
You might think there is a trivial solution to these problems, but which seems more likely to you?
Yes. Trivial. The reason I said "encryption" in the first place is that most of these would be going on Windows computers. Windows servers come with CA included. So it's trivial to authorize every device. Now, identifying all of them individually and ensuring no duplication would require an authentication step that doesn't exist today. But it's still trivial.
Either you're right and I'm wrong and there is an easy way to secure USB peripherals and collectively every IT organization on the planet is just too lazy to implement it,
You are asking the wrong question. It's impossible to secure USB today. It's trivial to do it if you wanted to (and had the hardware makers on board). And if the US governemnt said "if you don't do it, we'll never buy another of your devices, and make sure any grants to organizations will never be used to buy your stuff" you'd have 10 or so makers fight to get in on the program (at zero hardware cost to the government). After that it'd be free and trivial for IT departments to secure USB (while still generally allowing it).
The system must uniquely identify all USB devices. Just passing a UID would be sufficient to identify every USB device separately, but would run into the problem of trivial cloning.
Certificates are a white list. My computer knows *every* valid certificate. It may not store the necessary answer to all locally, but will go up the cert chain, which is an explicit white list. There is no "allowed" certificate that isn't recorded right not, explicitly. And for millions of unique sites. So the scale isn't an issue. We do more complex today.
Only governments have the kinds of money to throw at this problem that you'd need,
It's not the amount of money, but the willingless to spend it. Securing USB for all is a noble goal. Once the government is on board, then private IT can decide if it's worthy, and if so, adopt it for trivial cost. They are already running a CA server (in their Windows server), even if they just have that functionality turned off. The cost is to the hardware makers. And if they willingly accept the cost as a cost of doing business with the government, then everyone can benefit from it.
Trivial and cheap/free (to the users).
I have an i7-3612QM in my laptop. I don't try to go long periods away from power. But it's really nice to play casual games at desktop performance. And the cores do make a difference when having lots of things open, taking up background processing while doing something like a game, or doing something while playing a video out of the HDMI to a second monitor.
Speaking of which, I need to look up how I can send audio from one program out the HDMI while sending the audio from everything else out the laptop speakers. Because it's not too unusual for me to play a video via VLC for the kids, while doing something else, though never tried playing a game fullscreen on the laptop screen while playing a video in HD on the HDMI.
I don't claim to be a regular user. But I claim to actually use it that way.
So, because you don't like the messenger, you believe the opposite of the message he delivers?
Nah, the Left supports it because it's the truth. The right believes in whatever's convenient.
Why replace it. Nearly all will accept inputs. I can play any MP3 player through my car radio, without modification. Aux-in and USB ports are common, even in factory radios these days.