No, I didn't forget XP. I use it evet day at work and home. And I reserve my greatest scorn for it. I think XP is Microsoft's greatest failure to date. Period. I'd rather not mention it at all.
This isn't long at all. Microsoft is re-inventing the wheel here, and it will take a while. and it will suck mightily in many areas for the first release and first service pack.
Gang, I first ran Windows when it was called 'Windows'. And had a CPU board in the box. I thought I would grow senile before they fixed it. I was rewarded with Windows 2.0, which broke my favorite (ok, only) game. 3.0 was a joy, I need only reboot every few hours or so. 3.1 and then 3.11, and I need only reboot twice a night, while using a dialup ISP to run AOL. Admit it, you did too. Or IRC. Or USENET.
I neglected OS/2 at this point. Just as well. Only my bank, my ATM, and my whacked buddy were running it. Who cared? It was almost like Windows. Almost.
With 95, I bought the upgrade, installed it without trouble, and ran it without rebooting for *29* days! Woot! Then the first service pack came out. Never ran that long without rebooting again.
Windows 'ME' we will let rest in peace. I never ran it save for testing and support. Poor blighters that got it pre-installed. We forget...
The NT saga was just as painful. 3.0 stank. 3.1? 3.51 was tolerable compared to nothing. 4.0 finally rewarded us with a server that needed rebooting only once a week. My Novell servers sneered, and rightly so. And they lost. You think Microsoft has security trouble now? NT exposed the kernel like a pervert at the playground. Very bad. We forget...
2000 at least delivered on the promises. After a service pack. We forget...
I am in no hurry to buy Vista. I may even let it cook until SP1 is out. Besides, I got lots of other stuff to look at. Suse, Fedora, Ubuuntu, the list goes on...
But carping about delays with Vista? Yeah, whatever. I hope you get it quickly. those who want it NOW, you deserve it quick. And dirty. Ewwww.
What I meant to say was that the examples of both pro-Kerry and Pro-Bush discrepancies didn't prove anything to me, save that the exit polls didn't reflect the official outcome. Which isn't much to say, and doesn't indict the official results any more or less than the polls...
But on the topic of exit polls being reliable until 2000... Isn't it also likely that the exit polls have changed, and are failed?
Or do you think that election fraud in America only came into full bloom from 2000 on?
I doubt it. Unless the pollsters and the fraudsters were on the same page until 2000. Then it makes slightly more sense.
I'm confused.
First, you quoted the pro-Kerry in 'Bush' precincts discrepancies, then the pro-Bush in 'Kerry' precincts. Are you telling me both sides were rigging votes? Or that the counting is so bad that it was failed in both parties' favors? Or what? I'll be honest, when I read that in the article, I put it down as statisticians justifying their findings. Or can you in fact have it both ways...?
Second, are you saying that exit polls, when properly designed and executed, are accurate enough to dispense with the ballot count?
In other words, are you mad, or just blinded?
Just count the ballots. Verify the electronic count. Do the election, stupid. Ohio needs a working election system. I'm glad I don't live there.
sheesh. Next thing, you'll be recommending we have a TV show to elect our next President. Oh. Nevermind. That's been tried.
rick
I took a quick look through the uscountvotes.org article... Just to see the 'impossible' results.
First item I looked at was Precinct #25, and the analysis was fascinating.
- One test used was to compare the official results with exit polls. - One poll used was named 'Kerry Exit Poll'. - All polls were given the usual statistical treatement; sample sizes, margin of error, etc.
Amazing. This 'peer-reviewed' article relied on exit polls for its 'valid' data, and claimed that the discrepancy between exit polls and official counts resulted in such a disparity that the official results were to be considered 'impossible'.
Where I'm from, polls are generally considered humorous. Most polls go from misleading questions to poorly conceived answers, to ludicrous sample sizes.
I know, somewhere, there's a statistician who will dispute my uneducated claim that a national poll with a sample size of less than 30,000 respondents is marginally accurate. More important, though, is my contention (here for the first time by me) that self-selection renders most telephone and exit polls useless. I've bailed out of some polls in recent years when I could not answer a question in the best way I wanted to, and I felt that the options presented neither represented my opinion accurately, nor allowed me to give an answer that came close to my opinion...
Exit polls as a check on election fraud. What a joke! BAHAHAHAHAHA!
Next thing you know, they will want to estimate the vote.
Crap. All of it. If that article is the best the opposition has to offer, there is no opposition. Just contrary opinion, and the usual political hacking.
rick
ps- It should be obvious by now that e-voting the Diebold way is doomed. Disaster waiting to happen. Paper tape at the least is needed, and perhaps an open-source movement to write the software, and build the hardware. Don't let the government do it...
Well, after RTFA, I see it's all about the software and methods. Not the hardware.
But you were thinking of i-Openers, weren't ya?
That worked out well. I had two. My GF and her daughter *lived* on those things until they both found online dating the same week.
I killed the machines shortly thereafter. Her mom bought a Thinkpad asap. Her daughter got a scolding (first), then I gave her something more useful than the i-Opener.
Well, yes, sedition laws are probably unconstitutional, though the Alien and Sedition Acts have largely expired, and we're unlikely to see a challenge based on them. And certainly, if public speech is protected, then private speech likewise. Peacful overthrow, or more correctly stated, modification of our government should probably be protected. Violent overthrow would be violence. As such, not protected, though perhaps some day necessary. Never know.
It's interesting to me that many rebuttals of my posts presume I beleive this 'compact' would be unconstitutional, and indeed illegal. I don't think so, and I didn't intend to convey that impression. Buit I do beleive they are intended to subvert the intent of the Constitution, particularly in the area of representative government via the Electoral College method of Presidential election. And clearly, by his own admission, the author of TFA makes that point, if only by alluding to larger states' ambitions to exert more influence as a group than they can apart. And that may be legal, but it smacks of 'wrong'. At least to me.
If they can get away with it, ok. We enter a new era of politics. But in a nation where states manage their own elections, I see state-wide fraud and manipulation a greater threat. Since the 2000 elections, we've seen claims of widespred voting and elctoral (not the College)fraud, by all parties. If the states don't get a handle on this, we will sink into an abyss of perpetually contested election results, with the intent of one party to paralyze the government and force some other outcome, and of the other party dismissing the claims and fighting to take office. And don't think for a moment I am saying that any particular party will take any particular role in this. I'm guaranteeing it, sadly.
We could be on the brink of real trouble. Combine electronic, unverifiable voting with legal challenges, and add an Electoral College no longer trusted to represent the states' decisions, and we've got trouble.
And as a final point, while the Constitution doesn't specify how states manage their Electors, it should be clear that the Constitution intends for the College to reflect the states' wishes, which I construe to mean the states' votes. Anything else might be legal, but it's not how the game was intended to be played.
We ought to tell our state legislatures to specify how Electors should vote. Practically, they can sure go down to Washington and vote any damned way they choose, but then they might want to return to another jurisdiction. I am certain the states could choose to punish Electors that violated state law. If not, the system is pointless.
Like the Maine State trooper told my mom, many years ago;
"No, Ma'am, I don't have a quota. They let me write all the tickets I want."
Sure, TFA lines up nicely with our well-considered mistrust of gummint, agencies, police in general, and the DHS in particular. But quotas?
BAHAHAHAHAHA!
It's just dumb from every angle. Even for the Feds, it's dumb. Not to mention I'm wondering how most people get on the list. Suspicious travel patterns? Destinations? Known associates?
And the marshals have to submit ONE name a month? Sheesh, I could give them two or three a day, and not even read the newspaper. Here's a freebie: Pat Buchanan.:-)
This is trolling of the highest order. I'm laughing. Conspiracy theories are high humor!
It's not about appointment, nor about how states appoint Electors.
It's about collusion to manipulate the collective states' Electoral votes to the disadsvantage of those not participating... Rather than proportional repesentation, the article seems to suggest that states forming a compact would do so to enhance their impact on the election, and gain some advantage.
It's also not about how states might apportion their electoral votes. They seem to have great freedom to do that any way that seems right to them. But to agree to work together, outside Constitutional mandates, is the collusion I find dangerous and potentially unconstitutional. Very unlikely it is unconstitutional, though it is not impossible.
Next time, you might want to get a clue about what the issue is before posting.
I'm rethinking using the word 'sedition' though. Sedition is usually covert. This discussion is fairly overt. Not mutinous. Just selfish?
This author proposes a method to subvert the constitutional method of electing our President.
It's about a close to sedition as you can get. Maybe it IS sedition.
States' rights are under constant attack, and Article 10 is being dismantled in courts at every level in our country.
No surprise that large states are good candidates for this compact, nor that they may have come up with the idea. They see the proportionality as a problem for them. Damned right. They don't get to dictate so much, and that's as it should be. We are indeed the United STATES of America.
Nonetheless, I suspect every single state will get attention in the 2008 Presidential election. Some day you might need New Hampshire's two votes to get elected.
It's outrageous. Almost as bad as pure, receiptless electronic voting. Almost.
This snippet:
People don't use Ghost to make a copy of an unconfigured fresh install of Windows, they configure it first, then Ghost it.
caught my eye.
I do just THAT.
I have an XP Pro image Sysprepped to include most of the chipset, display, and NIC drivers I run into. Another for a client has a hosts file populated with their servers to simplify things. Works great. I skip most of the BS in copying files, and go right to HW config. When I need an disk driver, I have a ramdisk loaded with several that I select in a DOS menu. It's now on DVD, won't fit on an overburnt CD any more. Driver bloat. I hate them all.
Ever try installing Server 2003 on hardware that needs a disk driver without a floppy? Like an HP 580 with SAS drives? Ick.
I think image-based installs are wonderful, where they actually work, and even if Vista is no more than Sysprepped install, it's great.
Maybe Microsoft will sport over the MD5 checksum so we can make a Starbucks run while it computes.
EXACTLY. Except for the names of riders, of course.
And it was excellent last year, too.
Now to endure the carping from so many riders and teams about Floyd's 'bionic hip' next year. Sure, it really upped your grandmother's game, getting a hip transplant, didn't it?
I live in the Phoenix area. and I know of one datacenter, actually two, that have four feeds each. Yeah, one at each corner. The design is intended to guarantee that failure of two fo the four feeds requires events that span over 1000 feet at the site, and rapidly increase the span of the event to tens of miles. And multiple sources, such as nuclear, hydro, and fueled generators. And one of these facilities isn't even in use. It was 60% finished when the money ran out in the 90s. Sold now, it will be lit in a little while.
Forget the wiring. Besides being wireLESS, that was done 4 or more years ago. This batch doesn't have to support nearly as much infrastructure. Already there.
This is the second 4-year or so deal. Oughta be a steeper discount, especially since Maine is fronting the iBook assembly lines for a while. Alas, this is no bargain in so many ways.
Of course, the contract includes warranty support, Apple engineers providing bullet-proof, secure, unhackable images of OS X for student use, and inestimable technical support...
Yeah, I know. Unhackable. Just tellin' ya what the contractors say.
I've worked with a lot of Maine school systems to adapt their systems to the iBooks. It was a little like pulling teeth from a squid.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I didn't forget XP. I use it evet day at work and home. And I reserve my greatest scorn for it.
I think XP is Microsoft's greatest failure to date. Period. I'd rather not mention it at all.
Rick
... were waiting for Windows 3.1.
Or Windows 95.
or Windows 98.
or Windows NT 3.51
or Windows 2000.
How quickly we forget...
This isn't long at all. Microsoft is re-inventing the wheel here, and it will take a while. and it will suck mightily in many areas for the first release and first service pack.
Gang, I first ran Windows when it was called 'Windows'. And had a CPU board in the box. I thought I would grow senile before they fixed it. I was rewarded with Windows 2.0, which broke my favorite (ok, only) game. 3.0 was a joy, I need only reboot every few hours or so. 3.1 and then 3.11, and I need only reboot twice a night, while using a dialup ISP to run AOL. Admit it, you did too. Or IRC. Or USENET.
I neglected OS/2 at this point. Just as well. Only my bank, my ATM, and my whacked buddy were running it. Who cared? It was almost like Windows. Almost.
With 95, I bought the upgrade, installed it without trouble, and ran it without rebooting for *29* days! Woot! Then the first service pack came out. Never ran that long without rebooting again.
Windows 'ME' we will let rest in peace. I never ran it save for testing and support. Poor blighters that got it pre-installed. We forget...
The NT saga was just as painful. 3.0 stank. 3.1? 3.51 was tolerable compared to nothing. 4.0 finally rewarded us with a server that needed rebooting only once a week. My Novell servers sneered, and rightly so. And they lost. You think Microsoft has security trouble now? NT exposed the kernel like a pervert at the playground. Very bad. We forget...
2000 at least delivered on the promises. After a service pack. We forget...
I am in no hurry to buy Vista. I may even let it cook until SP1 is out. Besides, I got lots of other stuff to look at. Suse, Fedora, Ubuuntu, the list goes on...
But carping about delays with Vista? Yeah, whatever. I hope you get it quickly. those who want it NOW, you deserve it quick. And dirty. Ewwww.
We forget...
rick
What I meant to say was that the examples of both pro-Kerry and Pro-Bush discrepancies didn't prove anything to me, save that the exit polls didn't reflect the official outcome. Which isn't much to say, and doesn't indict the official results any more or less than the polls...
But on the topic of exit polls being reliable until 2000... Isn't it also likely that the exit polls have changed, and are failed?
Or do you think that election fraud in America only came into full bloom from 2000 on?
I doubt it. Unless the pollsters and the fraudsters were on the same page until 2000. Then it makes slightly more sense.
Statistics. A pox on the science.
rick
I'm confused. First, you quoted the pro-Kerry in 'Bush' precincts discrepancies, then the pro-Bush in 'Kerry' precincts. Are you telling me both sides were rigging votes? Or that the counting is so bad that it was failed in both parties' favors? Or what? I'll be honest, when I read that in the article, I put it down as statisticians justifying their findings. Or can you in fact have it both ways...? Second, are you saying that exit polls, when properly designed and executed, are accurate enough to dispense with the ballot count? In other words, are you mad, or just blinded? Just count the ballots. Verify the electronic count. Do the election, stupid. Ohio needs a working election system. I'm glad I don't live there. sheesh. Next thing, you'll be recommending we have a TV show to elect our next President. Oh. Nevermind. That's been tried. rick
Um, I'm not nearly as sanguine as you seem to be about the accuracy of exit polls.
In Maine, there have been a few elections where exit polls seemed to point to a clear winner. Surprise! Wrong-o! And no hanky-panky. Just bad polls.
The culprit? The exit pollers finshed up about 4pm. Voters kept coming until 7pm. Very different voters after 5.
An exception? Maybe. But not for certain. I'd have to see more info on the Ohio exit polls to see if they were similar, and similarly flawed.
rick
I took a quick look through the uscountvotes.org article... Just to see the 'impossible' results.
First item I looked at was Precinct #25, and the analysis was fascinating.
- One test used was to compare the official results with exit polls.
- One poll used was named 'Kerry Exit Poll'.
- All polls were given the usual statistical treatement; sample sizes, margin of error, etc.
Amazing. This 'peer-reviewed' article relied on exit polls for its 'valid' data, and claimed that the discrepancy between exit polls and official counts resulted in such a disparity that the official results were to be considered 'impossible'.
Where I'm from, polls are generally considered humorous. Most polls go from misleading questions to poorly conceived answers, to ludicrous sample sizes.
I know, somewhere, there's a statistician who will dispute my uneducated claim that a national poll with a sample size of less than 30,000 respondents is marginally accurate. More important, though, is my contention (here for the first time by me) that self-selection renders most telephone and exit polls useless. I've bailed out of some polls in recent years when I could not answer a question in the best way I wanted to, and I felt that the options presented neither represented my opinion accurately, nor allowed me to give an answer that came close to my opinion...
Exit polls as a check on election fraud. What a joke! BAHAHAHAHAHA!
Next thing you know, they will want to estimate the vote.
Crap. All of it. If that article is the best the opposition has to offer, there is no opposition. Just contrary opinion, and the usual political hacking.
rick
ps- It should be obvious by now that e-voting the Diebold way is doomed. Disaster waiting to happen. Paper tape at the least is needed, and perhaps an open-source movement to write the software, and build the hardware. Don't let the government do it...
Well, after RTFA, I see it's all about the software and methods. Not the hardware.
But you were thinking of i-Openers, weren't ya?
That worked out well. I had two. My GF and her daughter *lived* on those things until they both found online dating the same week.
I killed the machines shortly thereafter. Her mom bought a Thinkpad asap. Her daughter got a scolding (first), then I gave her something more useful than the i-Opener.
For revenge. And it was sweet, even cold.
-rick
Sadly, I always seem to want a horizontal screen. SSH on narrow screens is no joy.
-rick
Teaching the children english (and their native language, of course).
Providing a decent breakfast and lunch. let it be purchased locally.
Make your population literate and they will find opportunity themselves.
And yes, the U.S. could take this advice and change things. We are slowly failing our children.
-rick
Well, yes, sedition laws are probably unconstitutional, though the Alien and Sedition Acts have largely expired, and we're unlikely to see a challenge based on them. And certainly, if public speech is protected, then private speech likewise. Peacful overthrow, or more correctly stated, modification of our government should probably be protected. Violent overthrow would be violence. As such, not protected, though perhaps some day necessary. Never know.
It's interesting to me that many rebuttals of my posts presume I beleive this 'compact' would be unconstitutional, and indeed illegal. I don't think so, and I didn't intend to convey that impression. Buit I do beleive they are intended to subvert the intent of the Constitution, particularly in the area of representative government via the Electoral College method of Presidential election. And clearly, by his own admission, the author of TFA makes that point, if only by alluding to larger states' ambitions to exert more influence as a group than they can apart. And that may be legal, but it smacks of 'wrong'. At least to me.
If they can get away with it, ok. We enter a new era of politics. But in a nation where states manage their own elections, I see state-wide fraud and manipulation a greater threat. Since the 2000 elections, we've seen claims of widespred voting and elctoral (not the College)fraud, by all parties. If the states don't get a handle on this, we will sink into an abyss of perpetually contested election results, with the intent of one party to paralyze the government and force some other outcome, and of the other party dismissing the claims and fighting to take office. And don't think for a moment I am saying that any particular party will take any particular role in this. I'm guaranteeing it, sadly.
We could be on the brink of real trouble. Combine electronic, unverifiable voting with legal challenges, and add an Electoral College no longer trusted to represent the states' decisions, and we've got trouble.
And as a final point, while the Constitution doesn't specify how states manage their Electors, it should be clear that the Constitution intends for the College to reflect the states' wishes, which I construe to mean the states' votes. Anything else might be legal, but it's not how the game was intended to be played.
We ought to tell our state legislatures to specify how Electors should vote. Practically, they can sure go down to Washington and vote any damned way they choose, but then they might want to return to another jurisdiction. I am certain the states could choose to punish Electors that violated state law. If not, the system is pointless.
rick
Like the Maine State trooper told my mom, many years ago;
:-)
"No, Ma'am, I don't have a quota. They let me write all the tickets I want."
Sure, TFA lines up nicely with our well-considered mistrust of gummint, agencies, police in general, and the DHS in particular. But quotas?
BAHAHAHAHAHA!
It's just dumb from every angle. Even for the Feds, it's dumb. Not to mention I'm wondering how most people get on the list. Suspicious travel patterns? Destinations? Known associates?
And the marshals have to submit ONE name a month? Sheesh, I could give them two or three a day, and not even read the newspaper. Here's a freebie: Pat Buchanan.
This is trolling of the highest order. I'm laughing. Conspiracy theories are high humor!
Really, this is too funny!
rick
It's not about appointment, nor about how states appoint Electors.
It's about collusion to manipulate the collective states' Electoral votes to the disadsvantage of those not participating... Rather than proportional repesentation, the article seems to suggest that states forming a compact would do so to enhance their impact on the election, and gain some advantage.
It's also not about how states might apportion their electoral votes. They seem to have great freedom to do that any way that seems right to them. But to agree to work together, outside Constitutional mandates, is the collusion I find dangerous and potentially unconstitutional. Very unlikely it is unconstitutional, though it is not impossible.
Next time, you might want to get a clue about what the issue is before posting.
I'm rethinking using the word 'sedition' though. Sedition is usually covert. This discussion is fairly overt. Not mutinous. Just selfish?
Politics. ick.
-rick
This author proposes a method to subvert the constitutional method of electing our President.
It's about a close to sedition as you can get. Maybe it IS sedition.
States' rights are under constant attack, and Article 10 is being dismantled in courts at every level in our country.
No surprise that large states are good candidates for this compact, nor that they may have come up with the idea. They see the proportionality as a problem for them. Damned right. They don't get to dictate so much, and that's as it should be. We are indeed the United STATES of America.
Nonetheless, I suspect every single state will get attention in the 2008 Presidential election. Some day you might need New Hampshire's two votes to get elected.
It's outrageous. Almost as bad as pure, receiptless electronic voting. Almost.
rick
This snippet: People don't use Ghost to make a copy of an unconfigured fresh install of Windows, they configure it first, then Ghost it. caught my eye.
I do just THAT.
I have an XP Pro image Sysprepped to include most of the chipset, display, and NIC drivers I run into. Another for a client has a hosts file populated with their servers to simplify things. Works great. I skip most of the BS in copying files, and go right to HW config. When I need an disk driver, I have a ramdisk loaded with several that I select in a DOS menu. It's now on DVD, won't fit on an overburnt CD any more. Driver bloat. I hate them all.
Ever try installing Server 2003 on hardware that needs a disk driver without a floppy? Like an HP 580 with SAS drives? Ick.
I think image-based installs are wonderful, where they actually work, and even if Vista is no more than Sysprepped install, it's great.
Maybe Microsoft will sport over the MD5 checksum so we can make a Starbucks run while it computes.
rick
Looked EXACTLY THE SAME AS LAST YEARS SITE.
EXACTLY. Except for the names of riders, of course.
And it was excellent last year, too.
Now to endure the carping from so many riders and teams about Floyd's 'bionic hip' next year. Sure, it really upped your grandmother's game, getting a hip transplant, didn't it?
-rick
I live in the Phoenix area. and I know of one datacenter, actually two, that have four feeds each. Yeah, one at each corner. The design is intended to guarantee that failure of two fo the four feeds requires events that span over 1000 feet at the site, and rapidly increase the span of the event to tens of miles. And multiple sources, such as nuclear, hydro, and fueled generators. And one of these facilities isn't even in use. It was 60% finished when the money ran out in the 90s. Sold now, it will be lit in a little while.
a rea_regionalnews_stefanie_cohen__stephanie_gaskell _and_hasani_gittens.htm .. And that's a good chunk of municipal grid.
Of course, power is a problem. Ask the folks in Queens http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/disaster_
...think someone has too much free time.
Though I wish I were as talented as the authors, and could pull such crap out of my ass and, presumably, get paid for it.
That's the life.
rick
She WISHES it wasn't a dossier. rick
No chance Sandy Berger was in there looking at them. Check his socks. And his trash. At home. rick
Forget the wiring. Besides being wireLESS, that was done 4 or more years ago. This batch doesn't have to support nearly as much infrastructure. Already there.
This is the second 4-year or so deal. Oughta be a steeper discount, especially since Maine is fronting the iBook assembly lines for a while. Alas, this is no bargain in so many ways.
rick
Some of us did. No luck.
Of course, the contract includes warranty support, Apple engineers providing bullet-proof, secure, unhackable images of OS X for student use, and inestimable technical support...
Yeah, I know. Unhackable. Just tellin' ya what the contractors say.
I've worked with a lot of Maine school systems to adapt their systems to the iBooks. It was a little like pulling teeth from a squid.
rick
It would be par for the course to have Apple foist left over iBooks on the MLTI.
Even better to have Apple keep making them for 4 more years. Spares and such being such fun when models go into end-of-life.
Ah, my former employer is no doubt toasting the State of Maine. Doing third-party repair is a lucrative business, considering Apple's ineptitude.
rick
Which works fine, I'm sure.
Didn't really help me the past 5 weeks.
In fact, I wonder if Vista will support much of my old SCSI hardware. Upgrades all around! Wheeee!
sheesh.
rick
If you weigh just the storage, maybe a few tons...?
Count servers, and it's a load.
Of course, if you take into account only quality, maybe 30-40 ounces.
Value, weighted, to Rupert? Priceless.
rick
Yeah, XFCE would rock! Nothing much to run, but hell, who cares: we got a gui!