The article author gives two suggestions for improving electronic voting systems:
1. Leave a paper trail.
2. Make the code open source.
In response to issue one, I don't think that's really necessary in pure technical terms. However, voting isn't purely about technology. You have to convince people that something has securely happened. You have to give some sense of honesty, even if a machine is handling almost everything. This is especially important to people who use rather buggy computers and operating systems at home filled with problems.
With issue two, I'm sure greed and corporate paranoia played into the decision to not release voting machine code as open source. But I agree that it will quell plenty of the critics to know exactly what's going on in the box. Will this happen? Possibly, but I doubt it.
So, in short, I agree with the writer -- but will those suggestions actually be followed? The easiest to implement is the paper trail. The open source could eventually become a government-provided open source solution to hardware vendors. With the varying touch screen technologies, that sounds like a can of worms to me.
Crossfire itself wasn't hurting America. The idea that all discussions must involve side A and side B and neither can agree is hurting America. Lack of common ground is hurting America.
Stewart's premise was that real debate isn't happening. One side yells at the other side. Whoever can delude the most people wins.
However, I don't think a fair, logical discussion of the issues would work (for long) on network television. People want to see the gladiators fight -- certainly not gentlemen.
Well, my 4 words (as to why the parent poster voted for Bush) are not quite as laconic:
"Works For Defense Contractor"
You typically vote with your wallet. Conscience? What's that? (:
The difference in technology between what Sky Captain and Polar Express did was that the actors in Sky Captain were placed into a digitally created environment. The actors in Polar Express are represented digitally by computer simulations of how they move. So technically, "Polar" is closer to animated movies than "Sky Captain," but they do overlap a bit.
So, in "Captain," you had real actors in a fake world. In "Polar," you have animations representing real actors with sensors describing the real actor's movements.
I seriously doubt it. Republican administrations are always looking out for big business interests, and it's in the interest of large corporations to have as much control as possible over their products. If anything, patent law will become more strict.
Doesn't make sense that republicans are suppose to stand for lessening the control of government on the people (:
The best part of the article was the pink screen of doom.
Windows NT has a blue screen of death -- Linux has a pink screen of death. Blue is usually associated with boys -- pink is usually associated with girls.
According to johnkerry.com 250,000 votes remain uncounted in Ohio. Who ever gets those votes WINS.
My apologies, I haven't been keeping up with the latest numbers (:
As for the above statement, you do realize that both candidates will receive portions of the vote that correspond to the distribution of normal Ohio voters? If it's anything like the typical vote, there's no chance for Kerry. Again, it's highly unlikely that Kerry will win.
It's a shame, it was a good opportunity for USA to show the world they could do the right thing.
The right thing was to ditch all the political parties, eliminate all entangling alliances, and try and bridge the values gap between certain sections of the country (North and South).
Oh wait, wasn't that what Washington said hundreds of years ago?
CNN just called Wisconsin. It's more than a ray of hope, it's still very much up in the air!
That's all well and good. However, with Ohio, Bush doesn't need to win anything else. Kerry can get all the remaining states and end up with a 269/269 tie. With a 269 total electorial vote count, Bush will win by default in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives tiebreaker. As long as Bush has Ohio (which is mathematically most likely), he wins.
Well, yes. He could win Ohio at this rate with the extra ballots (provisional, overseas military, etc.).
To do so minimally (given the latest numbers - 147613), he'd have to get that many votes + half of the remaining votes + 1.
Assuming 300,000 votes remaining (including overseas military, which is most likely inflated), he'd have to get 223808 votes. . . which is close to 75% of the total number of votes remaining. Given the close statistical nature of the normal votes, getting this percentage is HIGHLY unlikely.
I believe Kerry is just prolonging things. I'd do it too if there was any ray of hope.
Unfortunately, I don't think this helped as much as was touted. The "young" vote requires at least the level of responsibility to show up at the polls and vote -- or at least fill out a form to vote.
While the many 'rock the vote' campaigns were noble in their purpose (and I respect the idea), it's ultimately flawed in that the younger you are, the more irresponsible you most likely are. Irresponsible people have a habit of not doing things they say they're going to do -- like vote.
There are plenty of exceptions. . . and plenty of responsible young people. But the total majority counts in voting.
Slashdot Mirror
The article author gives two suggestions for improving electronic voting systems:
1. Leave a paper trail.
2. Make the code open source.
In response to issue one, I don't think that's really necessary in pure technical terms. However, voting isn't purely about technology. You have to convince people that something has securely happened. You have to give some sense of honesty, even if a machine is handling almost everything. This is especially important to people who use rather buggy computers and operating systems at home filled with problems.
With issue two, I'm sure greed and corporate paranoia played into the decision to not release voting machine code as open source. But I agree that it will quell plenty of the critics to know exactly what's going on in the box. Will this happen? Possibly, but I doubt it.
So, in short, I agree with the writer -- but will those suggestions actually be followed? The easiest to implement is the paper trail. The open source could eventually become a government-provided open source solution to hardware vendors. With the varying touch screen technologies, that sounds like a can of worms to me.
Crossfire itself wasn't hurting America. The idea that all discussions must involve side A and side B and neither can agree is hurting America. Lack of common ground is hurting America.
Stewart's premise was that real debate isn't happening. One side yells at the other side. Whoever can delude the most people wins.
However, I don't think a fair, logical discussion of the issues would work (for long) on network television. People want to see the gladiators fight -- certainly not gentlemen.
Well, my 4 words (as to why the parent poster voted for Bush) are not quite as laconic: "Works For Defense Contractor" You typically vote with your wallet. Conscience? What's that? (:
Yeah, but I'm not trying to point people to read my magazine article, am I? (;
I wrote a this piece on Techworld about it.
That really makes me want to go read the article.
The difference in technology between what Sky Captain and Polar Express did was that the actors in Sky Captain were placed into a digitally created environment. The actors in Polar Express are represented digitally by computer simulations of how they move. So technically, "Polar" is closer to animated movies than "Sky Captain," but they do overlap a bit.
So, in "Captain," you had real actors in a fake world. In "Polar," you have animations representing real actors with sensors describing the real actor's movements.
I seriously doubt it. Republican administrations are always looking out for big business interests, and it's in the interest of large corporations to have as much control as possible over their products. If anything, patent law will become more strict.
Doesn't make sense that republicans are suppose to stand for lessening the control of government on the people (:
If you look at the full size image, you'll see that it's a mixture of red and gray foreground and background.
So it is (: I didn't blow it up (I'm in 1920x1200 res), but at first glance the grey and red made pink to me.
The best part of the article was the pink screen of doom.
Windows NT has a blue screen of death -- Linux has a pink screen of death. Blue is usually associated with boys -- pink is usually associated with girls.
My question:
What would their children look like!?
Whatever it would be, it would be GPLed (:
According to johnkerry.com 250,000 votes remain uncounted in Ohio. Who ever gets those votes WINS.
My apologies, I haven't been keeping up with the latest numbers (:
As for the above statement, you do realize that both candidates will receive portions of the vote that correspond to the distribution of normal Ohio voters? If it's anything like the typical vote, there's no chance for Kerry. Again, it's highly unlikely that Kerry will win.
It's a shame, it was a good opportunity for USA to show the world they could do the right thing.
The right thing was to ditch all the political parties, eliminate all entangling alliances, and try and bridge the values gap between certain sections of the country (North and South).
Oh wait, wasn't that what Washington said hundreds of years ago?
CNN just called Wisconsin. It's more than a ray of hope, it's still very much up in the air!
That's all well and good. However, with Ohio, Bush doesn't need to win anything else. Kerry can get all the remaining states and end up with a 269/269 tie. With a 269 total electorial vote count, Bush will win by default in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives tiebreaker. As long as Bush has Ohio (which is mathematically most likely), he wins.
Mastermind is the word. IE, he is smarter than all of the world. So are the Americans that vote for him.
I think it's easy to underestimate Bush. He says a lot of stupid things. . . Internets?
But, as this election has proved, having your opponent(s) underestimate you is always an advantage.
Well, yes. He could win Ohio at this rate with the extra ballots (provisional, overseas military, etc.). To do so minimally (given the latest numbers - 147613), he'd have to get that many votes + half of the remaining votes + 1. Assuming 300,000 votes remaining (including overseas military, which is most likely inflated), he'd have to get 223808 votes. . . which is close to 75% of the total number of votes remaining. Given the close statistical nature of the normal votes, getting this percentage is HIGHLY unlikely. I believe Kerry is just prolonging things. I'd do it too if there was any ray of hope.
Unfortunately, I don't think this helped as much as was touted. The "young" vote requires at least the level of responsibility to show up at the polls and vote -- or at least fill out a form to vote. While the many 'rock the vote' campaigns were noble in their purpose (and I respect the idea), it's ultimately flawed in that the younger you are, the more irresponsible you most likely are. Irresponsible people have a habit of not doing things they say they're going to do -- like vote. There are plenty of exceptions. . . and plenty of responsible young people. But the total majority counts in voting.