Paying for receiving calls is forwardness, not backwardness. As it is in Europe, providers can extort pretty much any rate they want on incoming calls, and the market doesn't punish them -- because it's the customers of other providers who pay. In Denmark it is typical that the inter-carrier rate is around 0.15EUR per minute, whereas in the US it's less than $0.01 per minute plus perhaps $0.10 for the customer on a really expensive plan. It also makes number portability between mobile and fixed networks possible.
The US mobile market is screwed up for a million reasons, but that is one thing they do right.
wifi doesn't count. Coverage is less than 0.1% of land area, no matter which provider you go with, and less than 1% of population.
Covering less than 50% of population is out of the question, and I'd avoid any service which didn't cover 50% of land area, perhaps even 75% of land area.
How many magicians does it take to change an election? How many engineers?
Besides, a magician can generally figure out how another magician did a trick. The same isn't true of engineers, unless you provide them with electron microscopes and allow them to destroy the voting machines. Even then, you could only prove that there was fraud, not what the correct result is.
If you think manually counting votes is hard, you haven't tried reverse engineering a computer chip.
I trust the number a human counter gives me because I can watch him count. Sure I can only watch in one location, but luckily I'm not the only paranoid person in the world.
Because recounting by hand defeats the purpose of electronic voting in the first place, negates the benefits, and should be astronomically less accurate.
Well, bye bye electronic voting then. How can you trust a number that a machine gives you? There are a million ways to hide malicious code in a computer.
[ ] It assumes that the volunteer poll workers are trustworthy.
You have to trust that the volunteer poll workers are reasonably trustworthy, at least as a group. (Or that the volunteers who watch the volunteers are trustworthy...) If you design correctly, they can only mess up their own counts, of course, and not everone elses.
The majority of computer professionals think using a computer to replace/augment paper ballots is just fine.
"Replace" and "augment" don't belong in the same sentence. Augmenting is fine, as long as the voter gets to approve the paper ballot, and all votes are recounted by hand. Why settle for less, when perfection is so cheap?
The PS3 machines being manufactured today don't have support for any PS2 games anymore..
Which is really damn annoying. I'm not going to keep three consoles, and right now those slots are PS2 and Wii (the Wii got to replace the Game Cube). Going PS3 would mean rebuying Singstar x 7, or keeping the PS2 around. The solution may be to rebuy Singstar x 7 for the Wii and dump the Playstations. Maybe add an Xbox 360 once they remove the airplane noise.
I think the Finnish 0.5% failure rate only includes votes where voter intent could not be discerned. Surely you don't have 5% of votes where you cannot figure out what the voter wanted.
It seems to me that we shouldn't tinker with the entire atmosphere if we don't have a good deal of confidence we can control one of the constituent phenomena.
Excellent. Stop using cars and electricity, the rest of us will be right behind you, I promise...
Ethernet encoding is simple and cheap. CSMA/CD is gone with 10G and I haven't seen a 1Gbps half duplex connection.
Yes, half duplex should just be banned entirely, but if you can implement it in a $0.10 10Mbps ethernet chip, you can probably survive the added $0.01 in your 1Gbps adapter, even if it never gets used.
So they want to make networks more expensive for EVERYONE so that they THEY can sell their products for less.
You don't have to buy switches which support the new features. Ethernet is just a low-overhead way to serialize frames onto 4 pairs of wire (or one pair of fiber).
The concept is problematic for a different reason: They believe that advanced features are needed because ethernet doesn't have enough bandwidth. That will only be true for a few years, then everyone will be doing multiple 10Gbps links to switches with 500+ Gbps bandwidth on the backplane -- you can even buy that today, it's just a bit pricey.
Slashdot Mirror
Paying for receiving calls is forwardness, not backwardness. As it is in Europe, providers can extort pretty much any rate they want on incoming calls, and the market doesn't punish them -- because it's the customers of other providers who pay. In Denmark it is typical that the inter-carrier rate is around 0.15EUR per minute, whereas in the US it's less than $0.01 per minute plus perhaps $0.10 for the customer on a really expensive plan. It also makes number portability between mobile and fixed networks possible.
The US mobile market is screwed up for a million reasons, but that is one thing they do right.
wifi doesn't count. Coverage is less than 0.1% of land area, no matter which provider you go with, and less than 1% of population.
Covering less than 50% of population is out of the question, and I'd avoid any service which didn't cover 50% of land area, perhaps even 75% of land area.
How many magicians does it take to change an election? How many engineers?
Besides, a magician can generally figure out how another magician did a trick. The same isn't true of engineers, unless you provide them with electron microscopes and allow them to destroy the voting machines. Even then, you could only prove that there was fraud, not what the correct result is.
If you think manually counting votes is hard, you haven't tried reverse engineering a computer chip.
I trust the number a human counter gives me because I can watch him count. Sure I can only watch in one location, but luckily I'm not the only paranoid person in the world.
With machines I can't do my part.
Because recounting by hand defeats the purpose of electronic voting in the first place, negates the benefits, and should be astronomically less accurate.
Well, bye bye electronic voting then. How can you trust a number that a machine gives you? There are a million ways to hide malicious code in a computer.
it's also an extended version of "ed" that is a very useful tool.
Yesterday my Fedora 9 updater told me that I had a security update.
For ed.
Just recount everything, all the time. A paper trail by itself is only necessary for a secure election, not sufficient.
Electronic Voting can be much better than paper ballots. We just need to stop being stupid about it.
"Much"? Anyway, it doesn't help that mathematicians can prove it is secure, if I can't.
computer-AND human-readable ballot
Make sure the stuff that the computer reads is the same stuff the human reads. No bar codes.
Always recount! Why would you ever want to not recount?
I like it...
Except this one:
[ ] It assumes that the volunteer poll workers are trustworthy.
You have to trust that the volunteer poll workers are reasonably trustworthy, at least as a group. (Or that the volunteers who watch the volunteers are trustworthy...) If you design correctly, they can only mess up their own counts, of course, and not everone elses.
The majority of computer professionals think using a computer to replace/augment paper ballots is just fine.
"Replace" and "augment" don't belong in the same sentence. Augmenting is fine, as long as the voter gets to approve the paper ballot, and all votes are recounted by hand. Why settle for less, when perfection is so cheap?
Just recount them all. It isn't hard, and it is an embarassingly parallel problem.
Several countries have done it successfully.
India & Brazil being the two largest (AFAIK)
Success being defined here as "most of the population believed the results".
If you have more than a few thousand people voting it can take an extememly long time to count the ballots.
"Extremely long" being about 4 hours for first count, and a few days for final results.
Which hardware RAID did you pick? Did you avoid RAID 5?
Most built-in (PCI-X, PCI-E etc) SAS/SCSI RAID solutions are completely useless for RAID 5.
That happens to be good enough backwards compatibility for me! Thanks a lot for the link.
The PS3 machines being manufactured today don't have support for any PS2 games anymore..
Which is really damn annoying. I'm not going to keep three consoles, and right now those slots are PS2 and Wii (the Wii got to replace the Game Cube). Going PS3 would mean rebuying Singstar x 7, or keeping the PS2 around. The solution may be to rebuy Singstar x 7 for the Wii and dump the Playstations. Maybe add an Xbox 360 once they remove the airplane noise.
That is why I pointed to our exhaustive preferential system as a probable cause of the greater informality rate.
That pretty much rules out using an exhaustive preferential system. Throwing out 5% of votes is just ridiculous.
I think the Finnish 0.5% failure rate only includes votes where voter intent could not be discerned. Surely you don't have 5% of votes where you cannot figure out what the voter wanted.
But most of the problem lies in the fact that they don't know the difference between {space bar} and {TAB} keys.
Most of the problem lies in the fact that everyone is using a "word processor" for document layout. Word processors should just die.
It seems to me that we shouldn't tinker with the entire atmosphere if we don't have a good deal of confidence we can control one of the constituent phenomena.
Excellent. Stop using cars and electricity, the rest of us will be right behind you, I promise...
Ethernet encoding is simple and cheap. CSMA/CD is gone with 10G and I haven't seen a 1Gbps half duplex connection.
Yes, half duplex should just be banned entirely, but if you can implement it in a $0.10 10Mbps ethernet chip, you can probably survive the added $0.01 in your 1Gbps adapter, even if it never gets used.
Price was the only real reason people stuck with it.
Cabling convenience and range count too.
So they want to make networks more expensive for EVERYONE so that they THEY can sell their products for less.
You don't have to buy switches which support the new features. Ethernet is just a low-overhead way to serialize frames onto 4 pairs of wire (or one pair of fiber).
The concept is problematic for a different reason: They believe that advanced features are needed because ethernet doesn't have enough bandwidth. That will only be true for a few years, then everyone will be doing multiple 10Gbps links to switches with 500+ Gbps bandwidth on the backplane -- you can even buy that today, it's just a bit pricey.