Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » The things you have to put up with sometimes
| The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64707] |
Mon, 20 February 2006 07:49  |
Rod Lincoln
Messages: 883
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a CD-Rom containing
wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work. It was
labled "Data CD".
I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools guy could
drag them in to his session.
Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried to listen
to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and it won't
play".
To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
"Oh....it's a data CD?"
"Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your wife?"
"Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
The things you have to put up with sometimes.
Rod
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64732 is a reply to message #64726] |
Mon, 20 February 2006 15:20  |
Kim
Messages: 1246
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Sometimes I wonder how some people manage to change channels on their TV...
....mind you, strange I should say that, because now that we have digital
television over here and digital set to boxes are becoming more common, a
lot of people are actually beginning to have trouble with that too. "But,
but why can't I just press 9 on the TV remote to watch channel 9?"...
Cheers,
Kim.
"Chris Lang" <yo@yo.yo> wrote:
>
>The EXACT same thing happened to me last week. The client is
>so convinced that nothing is on the CD I gave him, that he
>still hasn't paid. He's waiting until the engineer at his
>studio confirms that 24-bit .wav files cannot be played on a
>stereo.
>
>
>
>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a CD-Rom
containing
>>wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work. It
was
>>labled "Data CD".
>>I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools guy
>could
>>drag them in to his session.
>>Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried to
listen
>>to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and it won't
>>play".
>>To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
>>"Oh....it's a data CD?"
>>"Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your wife?"
>>"Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
>>So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
>>
>>
>>The things you have to put up with sometimes.
>>
>>Rod
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64750 is a reply to message #64732] |
Tue, 21 February 2006 01:39 |
rick
Messages: 1976
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
they're channels????????????????
On 21 Feb 2006 09:20:04 +1000, "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Sometimes I wonder how some people manage to change channels on their TV...
>
>...mind you, strange I should say that, because now that we have digital
>television over here and digital set to boxes are becoming more common, a
>lot of people are actually beginning to have trouble with that too. "But,
>but why can't I just press 9 on the TV remote to watch channel 9?"...
>
>Cheers,
>Kim.
>
>"Chris Lang" <yo@yo.yo> wrote:
>>
>>The EXACT same thing happened to me last week. The client is
>>so convinced that nothing is on the CD I gave him, that he
>>still hasn't paid. He's waiting until the engineer at his
>>studio confirms that 24-bit .wav files cannot be played on a
>>stereo.
>>
>>
>>
>>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a CD-Rom
>containing
>>>wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work. It
>was
>>>labled "Data CD".
>>>I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools guy
>>could
>>>drag them in to his session.
>>>Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried to
>listen
>>>to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and it won't
>>>play".
>>>To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
>>>"Oh....it's a data CD?"
>>>"Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your wife?"
>>>"Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
>>>So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
>>>
>>>
>>>The things you have to put up with sometimes.
>>>
>>>Rod
>>>
>>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64762 is a reply to message #64751] |
Tue, 21 February 2006 08:44 |
uptown jimmy
Messages: 441
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Tie the tubes, no more rubes...
Jimmy
"rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:s3olv1lr7tbd3v9l2u72phg8ink2iqlgo2@4ax.com...
> so that's what the judge meant when he said "no more for you". no one
> would tell me...thanks.
>
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 20:09:52 -0500, "uptown jimmy"
> <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
> >
> >Jimmy
> >
> >"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
> >news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
> >>
> >> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a CD-Rom
> >containing
> >> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work. It
was
> >> labled "Data CD".
> >> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools guy
> >could
> >> drag them in to his session.
> >> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried to
> >listen
> >> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and it
won't
> >> play".
> >> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
> >> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
> >> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your wife?"
> >> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
> >> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
> >>
> >>
> >> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
> >>
> >> Rod
> >>
> >
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64809 is a reply to message #64807] |
Wed, 22 February 2006 13:23 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
What about those who don't have the civic mindedness to implement a
reliable, secure, private, voter-verifiable voting system? Without that
it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes.
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
DJ wrote:
> I agree. I think this should extend to those who don't have the native
> intelligence to sign/punch/or otherwise properly manipulate a ballot as
> well.
>
> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:43fa69db$1@linux...
>> Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
>>
>> Jimmy
>>
>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
>>> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a CD-Rom
>> containing
>>> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work. It
> was
>>> labled "Data CD".
>>> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools guy
>> could
>>> drag them in to his session.
>>> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried to
>> listen
>>> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and it
> won't
>>> play".
>>> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
>>> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
>>> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your wife?"
>>> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
>>> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
>>>
>>>
>>> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
>>>
>>> Rod
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64811 is a reply to message #64809] |
Wed, 22 February 2006 13:51 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Now there you go again..........
;o)
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:43fcd7c0$1@linux...
>
> What about those who don't have the civic mindedness to implement a
> reliable, secure, private, voter-verifiable voting system? Without that
> it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes.
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
> DJ wrote:
> > I agree. I think this should extend to those who don't have the native
> > intelligence to sign/punch/or otherwise properly manipulate a ballot as
> > well.
> >
> > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > news:43fa69db$1@linux...
> >> Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
> >>
> >> Jimmy
> >>
> >> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
> >> news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
> >>> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a CD-Rom
> >> containing
> >>> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work. It
> > was
> >>> labled "Data CD".
> >>> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools
guy
> >> could
> >>> drag them in to his session.
> >>> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried to
> >> listen
> >>> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and it
> > won't
> >>> play".
> >>> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
> >>> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
> >>> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your wife?"
> >>> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
> >>> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
> >>>
> >>> Rod
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64812 is a reply to message #64811] |
Wed, 22 February 2006 14:30 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Nice quote Deej, that takes me back. I think if Ronnie were still
around, he would be in strong support of reliable, secure, private,
voter-verified voting systems in the U. S. of A.
As would any red blooded freedom loving American, like yourself. We're
not there at the moment and it's not a good thing for any voter and
taxpayer, be they Libertarian, Democrat, Republican, Green, Independent
or other.
The unfortunate thing is that non-secure, non-verifiable systems were
proposed and actually adopted in some places to replace the chad fiasco.
Out of the frying pan into the fire.
More here: http://www.blackboxvoting.org
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
DJ wrote:
> Now there you go again..........
>
> ;o)
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:43fcd7c0$1@linux...
>> What about those who don't have the civic mindedness to implement a
>> reliable, secure, private, voter-verifiable voting system? Without that
>> it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>> DJ wrote:
>>> I agree. I think this should extend to those who don't have the native
>>> intelligence to sign/punch/or otherwise properly manipulate a ballot as
>>> well.
>>>
>>> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>>> news:43fa69db$1@linux...
>>>> Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
>>>>
>>>> Jimmy
>>>>
>>>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
>>>>> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a CD-Rom
>>>> containing
>>>>> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work. It
>>> was
>>>>> labled "Data CD".
>>>>> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools
> guy
>>>> could
>>>>> drag them in to his session.
>>>>> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried to
>>>> listen
>>>>> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and it
>>> won't
>>>>> play".
>>>>> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
>>>>> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
>>>>> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your wife?"
>>>>> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
>>>>> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rod
>>>>>
>>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64817 is a reply to message #64812] |
Wed, 22 February 2006 18:44 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I'm with you there Jamie. It just seems like there is so much potential for
fraud, not only with voting machines and punch cards but also with the
additional problem of registration fraud and the inevitable muddying of the
waters by the various interest groups who are always bitching about state
laws which disallow those convicted of felons to vote. Rather than working
to have the laws changed, they seem to want to keep them in place so that
they can use them opportunistically at election time in order to paint the
*establishment* as unfair and hard hearted. Then after the election is over,
the whole issue is forgotten. It's incredibly hippocritical.
What would you suggest as a bulletproof electoral system, keeping in mind
that since this is a representative republic with an electoral college, the
electors will have the final vote?
Deej
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:43fce77a@linux...
>
> Nice quote Deej, that takes me back. I think if Ronnie were still
> around, he would be in strong support of reliable, secure, private,
> voter-verified voting systems in the U. S. of A.
>
> As would any red blooded freedom loving American, like yourself. We're
> not there at the moment and it's not a good thing for any voter and
> taxpayer, be they Libertarian, Democrat, Republican, Green, Independent
> or other.
>
> The unfortunate thing is that non-secure, non-verifiable systems were
> proposed and actually adopted in some places to replace the chad fiasco.
> Out of the frying pan into the fire.
>
> More here: http://www.blackboxvoting.org
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
> DJ wrote:
> > Now there you go again..........
> >
> > ;o)
> >
> > "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
news:43fcd7c0$1@linux...
> >> What about those who don't have the civic mindedness to implement a
> >> reliable, secure, private, voter-verifiable voting system? Without that
> >> it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> -Jamie
> >> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
> >>
> >>
> >> DJ wrote:
> >>> I agree. I think this should extend to those who don't have the native
> >>> intelligence to sign/punch/or otherwise properly manipulate a ballot
as
> >>> well.
> >>>
> >>> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >>> news:43fa69db$1@linux...
> >>>> Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jimmy
> >>>>
> >>>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
> >>>>> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a
CD-Rom
> >>>> containing
> >>>>> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work.
It
> >>> was
> >>>>> labled "Data CD".
> >>>>> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools
> > guy
> >>>> could
> >>>>> drag them in to his session.
> >>>>> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried
to
> >>>> listen
> >>>>> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and it
> >>> won't
> >>>>> play".
> >>>>> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
> >>>>> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
> >>>>> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your wife?"
> >>>>> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
> >>>>> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Rod
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >
> >
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64818 is a reply to message #64817] |
Wed, 22 February 2006 19:01 |
Martin Harrington
Messages: 560
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Deej,
Are you saying that all those that are elected went to College?
Surely not
Cheers
Martin Harrington
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:43fd22bf$1@linux...
> I'm with you there Jamie. It just seems like there is so much potential
> for
> fraud, not only with voting machines and punch cards but also with the
> additional problem of registration fraud and the inevitable muddying of
> the
> waters by the various interest groups who are always bitching about state
> laws which disallow those convicted of felons to vote. Rather than working
> to have the laws changed, they seem to want to keep them in place so that
> they can use them opportunistically at election time in order to paint the
> *establishment* as unfair and hard hearted. Then after the election is
> over,
> the whole issue is forgotten. It's incredibly hippocritical.
>
> What would you suggest as a bulletproof electoral system, keeping in mind
> that since this is a representative republic with an electoral college,
> the
> electors will have the final vote?
>
> Deej
>
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:43fce77a@linux...
>>
>> Nice quote Deej, that takes me back. I think if Ronnie were still
>> around, he would be in strong support of reliable, secure, private,
>> voter-verified voting systems in the U. S. of A.
>>
>> As would any red blooded freedom loving American, like yourself. We're
>> not there at the moment and it's not a good thing for any voter and
>> taxpayer, be they Libertarian, Democrat, Republican, Green, Independent
>> or other.
>>
>> The unfortunate thing is that non-secure, non-verifiable systems were
>> proposed and actually adopted in some places to replace the chad fiasco.
>> Out of the frying pan into the fire.
>>
>> More here: http://www.blackboxvoting.org
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>> DJ wrote:
>> > Now there you go again..........
>> >
>> > ;o)
>> >
>> > "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
> news:43fcd7c0$1@linux...
>> >> What about those who don't have the civic mindedness to implement a
>> >> reliable, secure, private, voter-verifiable voting system? Without
>> >> that
>> >> it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> -Jamie
>> >> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> DJ wrote:
>> >>> I agree. I think this should extend to those who don't have the
>> >>> native
>> >>> intelligence to sign/punch/or otherwise properly manipulate a ballot
> as
>> >>> well.
>> >>>
>> >>> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>> >>> news:43fa69db$1@linux...
>> >>>> Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Jimmy
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
>> >>>> news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
>> >>>>> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a
> CD-Rom
>> >>>> containing
>> >>>>> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work.
> It
>> >>> was
>> >>>>> labled "Data CD".
>> >>>>> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools
>> > guy
>> >>>> could
>> >>>>> drag them in to his session.
>> >>>>> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried
> to
>> >>>> listen
>> >>>>> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and it
>> >>> won't
>> >>>>> play".
>> >>>>> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
>> >>>>> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
>> >>>>> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your
>> >>>>> wife?"
>> >>>>> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
>> >>>>> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Rod
>> >>>>>
>> >>>
>> >
>> >
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64820 is a reply to message #64817] |
Wed, 22 February 2006 20:04 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Deej, you can read this long rant. But go here, too:
http://www.votersunite.org/
There is no bulletproof election system. I favor voting systems that are
run publicly, not privately. I wouldn't outsource elections across the
country to a few companies. It just invites corruption.
In Canada they vote with paper ballots. The count is quick and the
opportunity for fraud is much less than with invisibly hackable
computer-based systems.
An electronic voting machine with a removable memory card that can be
easily hacked on site is the wrong way to go. Any system hackable via
the internet is the wrong way to go. Any system with proprietary
software that cannot be tested for vote altering routines is the wrong
way to go. Any system that has a central counting server that can be
hacked is the wrong way to go.
Beyond making fraud easier, and difficult or impossible to trace,
computer-based systems also suffer software and hardware bugs and
failures that could change vote totals accidentally.
Proposals to tie the strengths of each together include touchscreen
systems that generate a voter-verifiable paper ballot. IF the paper
ballot is what is actually counted, that has potential. Some of these
schemes just have the paper as a backup for 1% random recounts in an
attempt to catch fraud, but they use the electronic count as THE count.
That is iffy. Some count paper ballots with scanners. The scanners can
be hacked, so testing with manual counts is important.
Right now there are a few companies wining and dining county clerks and
landing huge contracts. These companies count your vote. I've seen the
claim that 80% of all votes in America are counted by only two
companies: Diebold and ES&S. FWIW the vice president of Diebold and the
president of ES&S are reportedly brothers.
You mentioned felons, it's been reported that Diebold has five felons on
their development team and a Senior VP who was convicted of 23 counts of
felony theft.
Proprietary code runs on the machines. No one is allowed to look at the
code. Their technicians have way too much opportunity on-site and in
tabulation centers because the county people don't know how to run them.
Systems are inadequately tested and then given approval without real
tests for security and reliability.
Why is this happening? Follow the money.
Computer-based voting machines are sold as a way to make elections
easier for the clerks (clerks eat that up), but democracy isn't about
being easy. They are taking advantage of HAVA laws that spend large
amounts of your federal tax money on systems that are supposed to be
easier for handicapped voters, while making voting less secure and
accurate for all voters. The handicapped voters I have heard speak about
this do NOT like being used to promote poor systems. They want secure,
accurate, voter-verifiably systems, too. It doesn't have to be one or
the other.
Where I live, the county uses touchscreen voting systems with no paper
trail. I have no idea if my vote is registering accurately or being
counted at all. I testified about this in the state leg. We made some
progress in Colorado but much more needs to be done.
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
PS. Other kinds of fraud exist, too. There are fights about registration
as you point out, and other tricks to slant the turnout. It just goes to
show how much the temptation to cheat brings out cheating. No amount of
fraud in one area justifies making the system worse in another. We
shouldn't have to accept systems that invite invisible electronic fraud,
especially knowing how strong the temptation is to cheat.
We're talking about the potential for hidden, major fraud opportunities
in all elections on every level. Not just presidential/electoral college
situations. It's not good.
DJ wrote:
> I'm with you there Jamie. It just seems like there is so much potential for
> fraud, not only with voting machines and punch cards but also with the
> additional problem of registration fraud and the inevitable muddying of the
> waters by the various interest groups who are always bitching about state
> laws which disallow those convicted of felons to vote. Rather than working
> to have the laws changed, they seem to want to keep them in place so that
> they can use them opportunistically at election time in order to paint the
> *establishment* as unfair and hard hearted. Then after the election is over,
> the whole issue is forgotten. It's incredibly hippocritical.
>
> What would you suggest as a bulletproof electoral system, keeping in mind
> that since this is a representative republic with an electoral college, the
> electors will have the final vote?
>
> Deej
>
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:43fce77a@linux...
>> Nice quote Deej, that takes me back. I think if Ronnie were still
>> around, he would be in strong support of reliable, secure, private,
>> voter-verified voting systems in the U. S. of A.
>>
>> As would any red blooded freedom loving American, like yourself. We're
>> not there at the moment and it's not a good thing for any voter and
>> taxpayer, be they Libertarian, Democrat, Republican, Green, Independent
>> or other.
>>
>> The unfortunate thing is that non-secure, non-verifiable systems were
>> proposed and actually adopted in some places to replace the chad fiasco.
>> Out of the frying pan into the fire.
>>
>> More here: http://www.blackboxvoting.org
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>> DJ wrote:
>>> Now there you go again..........
>>>
>>> ;o)
>>>
>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
> news:43fcd7c0$1@linux...
>>>> What about those who don't have the civic mindedness to implement a
>>>> reliable, secure, private, voter-verifiable voting system? Without that
>>>> it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> DJ wrote:
>>>>> I agree. I think this should extend to those who don't have the native
>>>>> intelligence to sign/punch/or otherwise properly manipulate a ballot
> as
>>>>> well.
>>>>>
>>>>> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:43fa69db$1@linux...
>>>>>> Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jimmy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
>>>>>>> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a
> CD-Rom
>>>>>> containing
>>>>>>> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work.
> It
>>>>> was
>>>>>>> labled "Data CD".
>>>>>>> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools
>>> guy
>>>>>> could
>>>>>>> drag them in to his session.
>>>>>>> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried
> to
>>>>>> listen
>>>>>>> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and it
>>>>> won't
>>>>>>> play".
>>>>>>> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
>>>>>>> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
>>>>>>> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your wife?"
>>>>>>> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
>>>>>>> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rod
>>>>>>>
>>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64824 is a reply to message #64820] |
Wed, 22 February 2006 21:49 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Paper ballots would be fine by me. Redundant oversight by election officials
representing all parties would be fine too. I wouldn't give a flip if it
took a week or two to count the votes. The media would probably hate this
because of the *need it now* mindset, but too bad. I think exit polls should
be outlawed. the voters need to be responsible enough to show up at the
proper polling stations during the hours when the polls are open.......no
excuses, no exceptions and no one should be allowed to vote without a voter
registration and verifiable picture ID/ proof of citizenship. All voter
registration should be completed 60 days so that registrants can be vetted
and validated.during that time. Provisional balloting should be severely
restricted or disallowed altogether. If you can't prove who your are and
that you have the right to vote and you aren't capable of keeping your
affairs in order to
properly exercise you voting right within the legal guidelines and
timeframe, you're SOL.
Deej
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:43fd3595@linux...
>
> Deej, you can read this long rant. But go here, too:
>
> http://www.votersunite.org/
>
> There is no bulletproof election system. I favor voting systems that are
> run publicly, not privately. I wouldn't outsource elections across the
> country to a few companies. It just invites corruption.
>
> In Canada they vote with paper ballots. The count is quick and the
> opportunity for fraud is much less than with invisibly hackable
> computer-based systems.
>
> An electronic voting machine with a removable memory card that can be
> easily hacked on site is the wrong way to go. Any system hackable via
> the internet is the wrong way to go. Any system with proprietary
> software that cannot be tested for vote altering routines is the wrong
> way to go. Any system that has a central counting server that can be
> hacked is the wrong way to go.
>
> Beyond making fraud easier, and difficult or impossible to trace,
> computer-based systems also suffer software and hardware bugs and
> failures that could change vote totals accidentally.
>
> Proposals to tie the strengths of each together include touchscreen
> systems that generate a voter-verifiable paper ballot. IF the paper
> ballot is what is actually counted, that has potential. Some of these
> schemes just have the paper as a backup for 1% random recounts in an
> attempt to catch fraud, but they use the electronic count as THE count.
> That is iffy. Some count paper ballots with scanners. The scanners can
> be hacked, so testing with manual counts is important.
>
> Right now there are a few companies wining and dining county clerks and
> landing huge contracts. These companies count your vote. I've seen the
> claim that 80% of all votes in America are counted by only two
> companies: Diebold and ES&S. FWIW the vice president of Diebold and the
> president of ES&S are reportedly brothers.
>
> You mentioned felons, it's been reported that Diebold has five felons on
> their development team and a Senior VP who was convicted of 23 counts of
> felony theft.
>
> Proprietary code runs on the machines. No one is allowed to look at the
> code. Their technicians have way too much opportunity on-site and in
> tabulation centers because the county people don't know how to run them.
> Systems are inadequately tested and then given approval without real
> tests for security and reliability.
>
> Why is this happening? Follow the money.
>
> Computer-based voting machines are sold as a way to make elections
> easier for the clerks (clerks eat that up), but democracy isn't about
> being easy. They are taking advantage of HAVA laws that spend large
> amounts of your federal tax money on systems that are supposed to be
> easier for handicapped voters, while making voting less secure and
> accurate for all voters. The handicapped voters I have heard speak about
> this do NOT like being used to promote poor systems. They want secure,
> accurate, voter-verifiably systems, too. It doesn't have to be one or
> the other.
>
> Where I live, the county uses touchscreen voting systems with no paper
> trail. I have no idea if my vote is registering accurately or being
> counted at all. I testified about this in the state leg. We made some
> progress in Colorado but much more needs to be done.
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
> PS. Other kinds of fraud exist, too. There are fights about registration
> as you point out, and other tricks to slant the turnout. It just goes to
> show how much the temptation to cheat brings out cheating. No amount of
> fraud in one area justifies making the system worse in another. We
> shouldn't have to accept systems that invite invisible electronic fraud,
> especially knowing how strong the temptation is to cheat.
>
> We're talking about the potential for hidden, major fraud opportunities
> in all elections on every level. Not just presidential/electoral college
> situations. It's not good.
>
>
> DJ wrote:
> > I'm with you there Jamie. It just seems like there is so much potential
for
> > fraud, not only with voting machines and punch cards but also with the
> > additional problem of registration fraud and the inevitable muddying of
the
> > waters by the various interest groups who are always bitching about
state
> > laws which disallow those convicted of felons to vote. Rather than
working
> > to have the laws changed, they seem to want to keep them in place so
that
> > they can use them opportunistically at election time in order to paint
the
> > *establishment* as unfair and hard hearted. Then after the election is
over,
> > the whole issue is forgotten. It's incredibly hippocritical.
> >
> > What would you suggest as a bulletproof electoral system, keeping in
mind
> > that since this is a representative republic with an electoral college,
the
> > electors will have the final vote?
> >
> > Deej
> >
> >
> > "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:43fce77a@linux...
> >> Nice quote Deej, that takes me back. I think if Ronnie were still
> >> around, he would be in strong support of reliable, secure, private,
> >> voter-verified voting systems in the U. S. of A.
> >>
> >> As would any red blooded freedom loving American, like yourself. We're
> >> not there at the moment and it's not a good thing for any voter and
> >> taxpayer, be they Libertarian, Democrat, Republican, Green, Independent
> >> or other.
> >>
> >> The unfortunate thing is that non-secure, non-verifiable systems were
> >> proposed and actually adopted in some places to replace the chad
fiasco.
> >> Out of the frying pan into the fire.
> >>
> >> More here: http://www.blackboxvoting.org
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> -Jamie
> >> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> DJ wrote:
> >>> Now there you go again..........
> >>>
> >>> ;o)
> >>>
> >>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
> > news:43fcd7c0$1@linux...
> >>>> What about those who don't have the civic mindedness to implement a
> >>>> reliable, secure, private, voter-verifiable voting system? Without
that
> >>>> it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> -Jamie
> >>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> DJ wrote:
> >>>>> I agree. I think this should extend to those who don't have the
native
> >>>>> intelligence to sign/punch/or otherwise properly manipulate a ballot
> > as
> >>>>> well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:43fa69db$1@linux...
> >>>>>> Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Jimmy
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>> news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
> >>>>>>> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a
> > CD-Rom
> >>>>>> containing
> >>>>>>> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other
work.
> > It
> >>>>> was
> >>>>>>> labled "Data CD".
> >>>>>>> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the
protools
> >>> guy
> >>>>>> could
> >>>>>>> drag them in to his session.
> >>>>>>> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just
tried
> > to
> >>>>>> listen
> >>>>>>> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and
it
> >>>>> won't
> >>>>>>> play".
> >>>>>>> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
> >>>>>>> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
> >>>>>>> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your
wife?"
> >>>>>>> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
> >>>>>>> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Rod
> >>>>>>>
> >>>
> >
> >
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64827 is a reply to message #64824] |
Wed, 22 February 2006 22:28 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
DJ wrote:
> Paper ballots would be fine by me. Redundant oversight by election officials
> representing all parties would be fine too. I wouldn't give a flip if it
> took a week or two to count the votes. The media would probably hate this
> because of the *need it now* mindset, but too bad.
Agreed, absolutely. And it's entirely possible to count paper ballots in
a few hours.
> I think exit polls should
> be outlawed.
That's a tough one. First amendment issue.
> the voters need to be responsible enough to show up at the
> proper polling stations during the hours when the polls are open.......no
> excuses, no exceptions and no one should be allowed to vote without a voter
> registration and verifiable picture ID/ proof of citizenship. All voter
> registration should be completed 60 days so that registrants can be vetted
> and validated.during that time. Provisional balloting should be severely
> restricted or disallowed altogether. If you can't prove who your are and
> that you have the right to vote and you aren't capable of keeping your
> affairs in order to
> properly exercise you voting right within the legal guidelines and
> timeframe, you're SOL.
I agree somewhat, except if shenanigans are being pulled to
disenfranchise voters by underserving certain areas (long lines
discourage voting), or if ID systems amount to a poll tax, which is
illegal. ID is important, though. Also, 60 days is probably much longer
than necessary.
We can agree or disagree here and there, but the gigantic issue towering
over the rest is that the voting system is fast becoming untraceably
corruptible on a very wide scale. That must MUST be fixed, and soon.
Unfortunately the chairman of the committee who needs to approve changes
is blocking any attempt to fix HAVA, (he's from Ohio, home of Diebold).
Counties are itching to spend HAVA money now if they haven't already,
most interpret the law as mandating immediate spending which leaves them
choosing insecure systems. It's not only a huge waste of tax money but a
direct threat to your vote.
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
> Deej
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:43fd3595@linux...
>> Deej, you can read this long rant. But go here, too:
>>
>> http://www.votersunite.org/
>>
>> There is no bulletproof election system. I favor voting systems that are
>> run publicly, not privately. I wouldn't outsource elections across the
>> country to a few companies. It just invites corruption.
>>
>> In Canada they vote with paper ballots. The count is quick and the
>> opportunity for fraud is much less than with invisibly hackable
>> computer-based systems.
>>
>> An electronic voting machine with a removable memory card that can be
>> easily hacked on site is the wrong way to go. Any system hackable via
>> the internet is the wrong way to go. Any system with proprietary
>> software that cannot be tested for vote altering routines is the wrong
>> way to go. Any system that has a central counting server that can be
>> hacked is the wrong way to go.
>>
>> Beyond making fraud easier, and difficult or impossible to trace,
>> computer-based systems also suffer software and hardware bugs and
>> failures that could change vote totals accidentally.
>>
>> Proposals to tie the strengths of each together include touchscreen
>> systems that generate a voter-verifiable paper ballot. IF the paper
>> ballot is what is actually counted, that has potential. Some of these
>> schemes just have the paper as a backup for 1% random recounts in an
>> attempt to catch fraud, but they use the electronic count as THE count.
>> That is iffy. Some count paper ballots with scanners. The scanners can
>> be hacked, so testing with manual counts is important.
>>
>> Right now there are a few companies wining and dining county clerks and
>> landing huge contracts. These companies count your vote. I've seen the
>> claim that 80% of all votes in America are counted by only two
>> companies: Diebold and ES&S. FWIW the vice president of Diebold and the
>> president of ES&S are reportedly brothers.
>>
>> You mentioned felons, it's been reported that Diebold has five felons on
>> their development team and a Senior VP who was convicted of 23 counts of
>> felony theft.
>>
>> Proprietary code runs on the machines. No one is allowed to look at the
>> code. Their technicians have way too much opportunity on-site and in
>> tabulation centers because the county people don't know how to run them.
>> Systems are inadequately tested and then given approval without real
>> tests for security and reliability.
>>
>> Why is this happening? Follow the money.
>>
>> Computer-based voting machines are sold as a way to make elections
>> easier for the clerks (clerks eat that up), but democracy isn't about
>> being easy. They are taking advantage of HAVA laws that spend large
>> amounts of your federal tax money on systems that are supposed to be
>> easier for handicapped voters, while making voting less secure and
>> accurate for all voters. The handicapped voters I have heard speak about
>> this do NOT like being used to promote poor systems. They want secure,
>> accurate, voter-verifiably systems, too. It doesn't have to be one or
>> the other.
>>
>> Where I live, the county uses touchscreen voting systems with no paper
>> trail. I have no idea if my vote is registering accurately or being
>> counted at all. I testified about this in the state leg. We made some
>> progress in Colorado but much more needs to be done.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>> PS. Other kinds of fraud exist, too. There are fights about registration
>> as you point out, and other tricks to slant the turnout. It just goes to
>> show how much the temptation to cheat brings out cheating. No amount of
>> fraud in one area justifies making the system worse in another. We
>> shouldn't have to accept systems that invite invisible electronic fraud,
>> especially knowing how strong the temptation is to cheat.
>>
>> We're talking about the potential for hidden, major fraud opportunities
>> in all elections on every level. Not just presidential/electoral college
>> situations. It's not good.
>>
>>
>> DJ wrote:
>>> I'm with you there Jamie. It just seems like there is so much potential
> for
>>> fraud, not only with voting machines and punch cards but also with the
>>> additional problem of registration fraud and the inevitable muddying of
> the
>>> waters by the various interest groups who are always bitching about
> state
>>> laws which disallow those convicted of felons to vote. Rather than
> working
>>> to have the laws changed, they seem to want to keep them in place so
> that
>>> they can use them opportunistically at election time in order to paint
> the
>>> *establishment* as unfair and hard hearted. Then after the election is
> over,
>>> the whole issue is forgotten. It's incredibly hippocritical.
>>>
>>> What would you suggest as a bulletproof electoral system, keeping in
> mind
>>> that since this is a representative republic with an electoral college,
> the
>>> electors will have the final vote?
>>>
>>> Deej
>>>
>>>
>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:43fce77a@linux...
>>>> Nice quote Deej, that takes me back. I think if Ronnie were still
>>>> around, he would be in strong support of reliable, secure, private,
>>>> voter-verified voting systems in the U. S. of A.
>>>>
>>>> As would any red blooded freedom loving American, like yourself. We're
>>>> not there at the moment and it's not a good thing for any voter and
>>>> taxpayer, be they Libertarian, Democrat, Republican, Green, Independent
>>>> or other.
>>>>
>>>> The unfortunate thing is that non-secure, non-verifiable systems were
>>>> proposed and actually adopted in some places to replace the chad
> fiasco.
>>>> Out of the frying pan into the fire.
>>>>
>>>> More here: http://www.blackboxvoting.org
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> DJ wrote:
>>>>> Now there you go again..........
>>>>>
>>>>> ;o)
>>>>>
>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>> news:43fcd7c0$1@linux...
>>>>>> What about those who don't have the civic mindedness to implement a
>>>>>> reliable, secure, private, voter-verifiable voting system? Without
> that
>>>>>> it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DJ wrote:
>>>>>>> I agree. I think this should extend to those who don't have the
> native
>>>>>>> intelligence to sign/punch/or otherwise properly manipulate a ballot
>>> as
>>>>>>> well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:43fa69db$1@linux...
>>>>>>>> Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jimmy
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a
>>> CD-Rom
>>>>>>>> containing
>>>>>>>>> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other
> work.
>>> It
>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>> labled "Data CD".
>>>>>>>>> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the
> protools
>>>>> guy
>>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>>> drag them in to his session.
>>>>>>>>> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just
> tried
>>> to
>>>>>>>> listen
>>>>>>>>> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and
> it
>>>>>>> won't
>>>>>>>>> play".
>>>>>>>>> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
>>>>>>>>> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
>>>>>>>>> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your
> wife?"
>>>>>>>>> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
>>>>>>>>> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rod
>>>>>>>>>
>>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64844 is a reply to message #64812] |
Thu, 23 February 2006 09:48 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Bruce Schneir has written about this extensively. Both electronic and non-electronic
voting systems can be used fradulently, and both have been.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2004/11/the_problem_wi t.html
Non-electronic voting systems are usually used fraudulently in ham fisted
ways like taking sacks of Joe Kennedy's cash to West Virginia to buy it for
his boy. Electronic ones are used differently when fraud is the goal. Any
rational US citizen should want accurate vote tallying and good electronic
systems (as Schneir points out) can make that result _more_ likely. Bad systems
almost assure bad tallies.
BTW - Democrat bellyaching about voter fraud rings rather hollow to one with
a solid understanding of US electoral history. Capitol D Democratic political
machines all over the East Coast and in Chicago and Ohio regularly brokered
presidential elections with deeply questionable tactics. The current Republican
administrations are using similar tactics to those they suffered for years
as the minority party. Payback's a bitch.
I voted for Nader last time, in case anyone is wondering, because he actually
_does_ want an accurate as opposed to winning vote count.
TCB
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>Nice quote Deej, that takes me back. I think if Ronnie were still
>around, he would be in strong support of reliable, secure, private,
>voter-verified voting systems in the U. S. of A.
>
>As would any red blooded freedom loving American, like yourself. We're
>not there at the moment and it's not a good thing for any voter and
>taxpayer, be they Libertarian, Democrat, Republican, Green, Independent
>or other.
>
>The unfortunate thing is that non-secure, non-verifiable systems were
>proposed and actually adopted in some places to replace the chad fiasco.
>Out of the frying pan into the fire.
>
>More here: http://www.blackboxvoting.org
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>DJ wrote:
>> Now there you go again..........
>>
>> ;o)
>>
>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:43fcd7c0$1@linux...
>>> What about those who don't have the civic mindedness to implement a
>>> reliable, secure, private, voter-verifiable voting system? Without that
>>> it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>> DJ wrote:
>>>> I agree. I think this should extend to those who don't have the native
>>>> intelligence to sign/punch/or otherwise properly manipulate a ballot
as
>>>> well.
>>>>
>>>> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:43fa69db$1@linux...
>>>>> Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jimmy
>>>>>
>>>>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
>>>>>> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a CD-Rom
>>>>> containing
>>>>>> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work.
It
>>>> was
>>>>>> labled "Data CD".
>>>>>> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools
>> guy
>>>>> could
>>>>>> drag them in to his session.
>>>>>> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried
to
>>>>> listen
>>>>>> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and it
>>>> won't
>>>>>> play".
>>>>>> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
>>>>>> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
>>>>>> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your wife?"
>>>>>> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
>>>>>> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rod
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64847 is a reply to message #64844] |
Thu, 23 February 2006 08:51 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> Non-electronic voting systems are usually used fraudulently in ham fisted
> ways like taking sacks of Joe Kennedy's cash to West Virginia to buy it
for
> his boy.
.............not to mention Uncle Sam (Giancana) giving his fellow mobster's
son a push in the right direction in Illinois........and the dead have
participated in a few elections in south Texas......and were fond of LBJ
IIRC.
;o).
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:43fde748$1@linux...
>
> Bruce Schneir has written about this extensively. Both electronic and
non-electronic
> voting systems can be used fradulently, and both have been.
>
> http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2004/11/the_problem_wi t.html
>
> Non-electronic voting systems are usually used fraudulently in ham fisted
> ways like taking sacks of Joe Kennedy's cash to West Virginia to buy it
for
> his boy. Electronic ones are used differently when fraud is the goal. Any
> rational US citizen should want accurate vote tallying and good electronic
> systems (as Schneir points out) can make that result _more_ likely. Bad
systems
> almost assure bad tallies.
>
> BTW - Democrat bellyaching about voter fraud rings rather hollow to one
with
> a solid understanding of US electoral history. Capitol D Democratic
political
> machines all over the East Coast and in Chicago and Ohio regularly
brokered
> presidential elections with deeply questionable tactics. The current
Republican
> administrations are using similar tactics to those they suffered for years
> as the minority party. Payback's a bitch.
>
> I voted for Nader last time, in case anyone is wondering, because he
actually
> _does_ want an accurate as opposed to winning vote count.
>
> TCB
>
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
> >
> >Nice quote Deej, that takes me back. I think if Ronnie were still
> >around, he would be in strong support of reliable, secure, private,
> >voter-verified voting systems in the U. S. of A.
> >
> >As would any red blooded freedom loving American, like yourself. We're
> >not there at the moment and it's not a good thing for any voter and
> >taxpayer, be they Libertarian, Democrat, Republican, Green, Independent
>
> >or other.
> >
> >The unfortunate thing is that non-secure, non-verifiable systems were
> >proposed and actually adopted in some places to replace the chad fiasco.
>
> >Out of the frying pan into the fire.
> >
> >More here: http://www.blackboxvoting.org
> >
> >Cheers,
> > -Jamie
> > http://www.JamieKrutz.com
> >
> >
> >
> >DJ wrote:
> >> Now there you go again..........
> >>
> >> ;o)
> >>
> >> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
news:43fcd7c0$1@linux...
> >>> What about those who don't have the civic mindedness to implement a
> >>> reliable, secure, private, voter-verifiable voting system? Without
that
> >>> it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> -Jamie
> >>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> DJ wrote:
> >>>> I agree. I think this should extend to those who don't have the
native
> >>>> intelligence to sign/punch/or otherwise properly manipulate a ballot
> as
> >>>> well.
> >>>>
> >>>> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >>>> news:43fa69db$1@linux...
> >>>>> Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jimmy
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
> >>>>>> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a
CD-Rom
> >>>>> containing
> >>>>>> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work.
> It
> >>>> was
> >>>>>> labled "Data CD".
> >>>>>> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools
> >> guy
> >>>>> could
> >>>>>> drag them in to his session.
> >>>>>> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried
> to
> >>>>> listen
> >>>>>> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and it
> >>>> won't
> >>>>>> play".
> >>>>>> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
> >>>>>> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
> >>>>>> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your
wife?"
> >>>>>> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
> >>>>>> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Rod
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64848 is a reply to message #64847] |
Thu, 23 February 2006 10:01 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The dead _still_ vote in New Haven. A lot of them. We're one of the last Democratic
machine towns in the US. The city council is 1 Republican, 17 Democrats,
and two independents who caucus with the Dems. It's nuts.
Read the Schneier article. It's long but it's really good and he wrote the
blowfish algorithm (and was almost prosecuted for it) so his security/privacy
bona fides are unimpeachable.
TCB
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>> Non-electronic voting systems are usually used fraudulently in ham fisted
>> ways like taking sacks of Joe Kennedy's cash to West Virginia to buy it
>for
>> his boy.
>
>............not to mention Uncle Sam (Giancana) giving his fellow mobster's
>son a push in the right direction in Illinois........and the dead have
>participated in a few elections in south Texas......and were fond of LBJ
>IIRC.
>
>;o).
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:43fde748$1@linux...
>>
>> Bruce Schneir has written about this extensively. Both electronic and
>non-electronic
>> voting systems can be used fradulently, and both have been.
>>
>> http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2004/11/the_problem_wi t.html
>>
>> Non-electronic voting systems are usually used fraudulently in ham fisted
>> ways like taking sacks of Joe Kennedy's cash to West Virginia to buy it
>for
>> his boy. Electronic ones are used differently when fraud is the goal.
Any
>> rational US citizen should want accurate vote tallying and good electronic
>> systems (as Schneir points out) can make that result _more_ likely. Bad
>systems
>> almost assure bad tallies.
>>
>> BTW - Democrat bellyaching about voter fraud rings rather hollow to one
>with
>> a solid understanding of US electoral history. Capitol D Democratic
>political
>> machines all over the East Coast and in Chicago and Ohio regularly
>brokered
>> presidential elections with deeply questionable tactics. The current
>Republican
>> administrations are using similar tactics to those they suffered for years
>> as the minority party. Payback's a bitch.
>>
>> I voted for Nader last time, in case anyone is wondering, because he
>actually
>> _does_ want an accurate as opposed to winning vote count.
>>
>> TCB
>>
>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Nice quote Deej, that takes me back. I think if Ronnie were still
>> >around, he would be in strong support of reliable, secure, private,
>> >voter-verified voting systems in the U. S. of A.
>> >
>> >As would any red blooded freedom loving American, like yourself. We're
>> >not there at the moment and it's not a good thing for any voter and
>> >taxpayer, be they Libertarian, Democrat, Republican, Green, Independent
>>
>> >or other.
>> >
>> >The unfortunate thing is that non-secure, non-verifiable systems were
>> >proposed and actually adopted in some places to replace the chad fiasco.
>>
>> >Out of the frying pan into the fire.
>> >
>> >More here: http://www.blackboxvoting.org
>> >
>> >Cheers,
>> > -Jamie
>> > http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >DJ wrote:
>> >> Now there you go again..........
>> >>
>> >> ;o)
>> >>
>> >> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>news:43fcd7c0$1@linux...
>> >>> What about those who don't have the civic mindedness to implement
a
>> >>> reliable, secure, private, voter-verifiable voting system? Without
>that
>> >>> it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes.
>> >>>
>> >>> Cheers,
>> >>> -Jamie
>> >>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> DJ wrote:
>> >>>> I agree. I think this should extend to those who don't have the
>native
>> >>>> intelligence to sign/punch/or otherwise properly manipulate a ballot
>> as
>> >>>> well.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>> >>>> news:43fa69db$1@linux...
>> >>>>> Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Jimmy
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
>> >>>>> news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
>> >>>>>> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a
>CD-Rom
>> >>>>> containing
>> >>>>>> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other work.
>> It
>> >>>> was
>> >>>>>> labled "Data CD".
>> >>>>>> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the protools
>> >> guy
>> >>>>> could
>> >>>>>> drag them in to his session.
>> >>>>>> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just tried
>> to
>> >>>>> listen
>> >>>>>> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and
it
>> >>>> won't
>> >>>>>> play".
>> >>>>>> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
>> >>>>>> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
>> >>>>>> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your
>wife?"
>> >>>>>> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
>> >>>>>> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Rod
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64854 is a reply to message #64824] |
Thu, 23 February 2006 09:57 |
Tony Benson
Messages: 453
Registered: June 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
You hit the nail on the head again DJ. To quote the incredibly profound
movie Spiderman ;>), "With great power comes great responsibility." Yeh, I
know it's corny, but it's true. As soon as you start talking about people
being responsible though, someone starts whining about being
disenfranchised. It takes too much time and effort and basic intelligence to
be responsible yada, yada, yada. Ok, rant over.
Tony
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:43fd4e12@linux...
> Paper ballots would be fine by me. Redundant oversight by election
> officials
> representing all parties would be fine too. I wouldn't give a flip if it
> took a week or two to count the votes. The media would probably hate this
> because of the *need it now* mindset, but too bad. I think exit polls
> should
> be outlawed. the voters need to be responsible enough to show up at the
> proper polling stations during the hours when the polls are open.......no
> excuses, no exceptions and no one should be allowed to vote without a
> voter
> registration and verifiable picture ID/ proof of citizenship. All voter
> registration should be completed 60 days so that registrants can be vetted
> and validated.during that time. Provisional balloting should be severely
> restricted or disallowed altogether. If you can't prove who your are and
> that you have the right to vote and you aren't capable of keeping your
> affairs in order to
> properly exercise you voting right within the legal guidelines and
> timeframe, you're SOL.
>
> Deej
>
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:43fd3595@linux...
>>
>> Deej, you can read this long rant. But go here, too:
>>
>> http://www.votersunite.org/
>>
>> There is no bulletproof election system. I favor voting systems that are
>> run publicly, not privately. I wouldn't outsource elections across the
>> country to a few companies. It just invites corruption.
>>
>> In Canada they vote with paper ballots. The count is quick and the
>> opportunity for fraud is much less than with invisibly hackable
>> computer-based systems.
>>
>> An electronic voting machine with a removable memory card that can be
>> easily hacked on site is the wrong way to go. Any system hackable via
>> the internet is the wrong way to go. Any system with proprietary
>> software that cannot be tested for vote altering routines is the wrong
>> way to go. Any system that has a central counting server that can be
>> hacked is the wrong way to go.
>>
>> Beyond making fraud easier, and difficult or impossible to trace,
>> computer-based systems also suffer software and hardware bugs and
>> failures that could change vote totals accidentally.
>>
>> Proposals to tie the strengths of each together include touchscreen
>> systems that generate a voter-verifiable paper ballot. IF the paper
>> ballot is what is actually counted, that has potential. Some of these
>> schemes just have the paper as a backup for 1% random recounts in an
>> attempt to catch fraud, but they use the electronic count as THE count.
>> That is iffy. Some count paper ballots with scanners. The scanners can
>> be hacked, so testing with manual counts is important.
>>
>> Right now there are a few companies wining and dining county clerks and
>> landing huge contracts. These companies count your vote. I've seen the
>> claim that 80% of all votes in America are counted by only two
>> companies: Diebold and ES&S. FWIW the vice president of Diebold and the
>> president of ES&S are reportedly brothers.
>>
>> You mentioned felons, it's been reported that Diebold has five felons on
>> their development team and a Senior VP who was convicted of 23 counts of
>> felony theft.
>>
>> Proprietary code runs on the machines. No one is allowed to look at the
>> code. Their technicians have way too much opportunity on-site and in
>> tabulation centers because the county people don't know how to run them.
>> Systems are inadequately tested and then given approval without real
>> tests for security and reliability.
>>
>> Why is this happening? Follow the money.
>>
>> Computer-based voting machines are sold as a way to make elections
>> easier for the clerks (clerks eat that up), but democracy isn't about
>> being easy. They are taking advantage of HAVA laws that spend large
>> amounts of your federal tax money on systems that are supposed to be
>> easier for handicapped voters, while making voting less secure and
>> accurate for all voters. The handicapped voters I have heard speak about
>> this do NOT like being used to promote poor systems. They want secure,
>> accurate, voter-verifiably systems, too. It doesn't have to be one or
>> the other.
>>
>> Where I live, the county uses touchscreen voting systems with no paper
>> trail. I have no idea if my vote is registering accurately or being
>> counted at all. I testified about this in the state leg. We made some
>> progress in Colorado but much more needs to be done.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>> PS. Other kinds of fraud exist, too. There are fights about registration
>> as you point out, and other tricks to slant the turnout. It just goes to
>> show how much the temptation to cheat brings out cheating. No amount of
>> fraud in one area justifies making the system worse in another. We
>> shouldn't have to accept systems that invite invisible electronic fraud,
>> especially knowing how strong the temptation is to cheat.
>>
>> We're talking about the potential for hidden, major fraud opportunities
>> in all elections on every level. Not just presidential/electoral college
>> situations. It's not good.
>>
>>
>> DJ wrote:
>> > I'm with you there Jamie. It just seems like there is so much potential
> for
>> > fraud, not only with voting machines and punch cards but also with the
>> > additional problem of registration fraud and the inevitable muddying of
> the
>> > waters by the various interest groups who are always bitching about
> state
>> > laws which disallow those convicted of felons to vote. Rather than
> working
>> > to have the laws changed, they seem to want to keep them in place so
> that
>> > they can use them opportunistically at election time in order to paint
> the
>> > *establishment* as unfair and hard hearted. Then after the election is
> over,
>> > the whole issue is forgotten. It's incredibly hippocritical.
>> >
>> > What would you suggest as a bulletproof electoral system, keeping in
> mind
>> > that since this is a representative republic with an electoral college,
> the
>> > electors will have the final vote?
>> >
>> > Deej
>> >
>> >
>> > "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>> > news:43fce77a@linux...
>> >> Nice quote Deej, that takes me back. I think if Ronnie were still
>> >> around, he would be in strong support of reliable, secure, private,
>> >> voter-verified voting systems in the U. S. of A.
>> >>
>> >> As would any red blooded freedom loving American, like yourself. We're
>> >> not there at the moment and it's not a good thing for any voter and
>> >> taxpayer, be they Libertarian, Democrat, Republican, Green,
>> >> Independent
>> >> or other.
>> >>
>> >> The unfortunate thing is that non-secure, non-verifiable systems were
>> >> proposed and actually adopted in some places to replace the chad
> fiasco.
>> >> Out of the frying pan into the fire.
>> >>
>> >> More here: http://www.blackboxvoting.org
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> -Jamie
>> >> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> DJ wrote:
>> >>> Now there you go again..........
>> >>>
>> >>> ;o)
>> >>>
>> >>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>> > news:43fcd7c0$1@linux...
>> >>>> What about those who don't have the civic mindedness to implement a
>> >>>> reliable, secure, private, voter-verifiable voting system? Without
> that
>> >>>> it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Cheers,
>> >>>> -Jamie
>> >>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> DJ wrote:
>> >>>>> I agree. I think this should extend to those who don't have the
> native
>> >>>>> intelligence to sign/punch/or otherwise properly manipulate a
>> >>>>> ballot
>> > as
>> >>>>> well.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>> >>>>> news:43fa69db$1@linux...
>> >>>>>> Most humans are stupid, and shouldn't have breeding rights.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Jimmy
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
>> >>>>>> news:43f9d6fe$1@linux...
>> >>>>>>> A couple of days ago I did some tracks for a client and burnt a
>> > CD-Rom
>> >>>>>> containing
>> >>>>>>> wave files for him to take to another studio to do some other
> work.
>> > It
>> >>>>> was
>> >>>>>>> labled "Data CD".
>> >>>>>>> I explained how all the files were perfectly synced so the
> protools
>> >>> guy
>> >>>>>> could
>> >>>>>>> drag them in to his session.
>> >>>>>>> Five minutes after he left my house he called, saying "I just
> tried
>> > to
>> >>>>>> listen
>> >>>>>>> to this in my wife's car, and she has a REAL good CD player, and
> it
>> >>>>> won't
>> >>>>>>> play".
>> >>>>>>> To which I say....."It's a DATA CD"
>> >>>>>>> "Oh....it's a data CD?"
>> >>>>>>> "Yes, whould you like an audio CD so you can play it for your
> wife?"
>> >>>>>>> "Yes, maybe that's a good idea"
>> >>>>>>> So he came right back and I burnt an audio CD for him.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> The things you have to put up with sometimes.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Rod
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>
>> >
>> >
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The things you have to put up with sometimes [message #64872 is a reply to message #64860] |
Thu, 23 February 2006 15:32 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Do you think that an entity with so little native intelligence that they
cannot function on a level sufficient to allow them to cast a ballot
for/against something should be allowed a voice in determining the future
government of this country? Sorry, but people who have been legally
adjudicated non-compos-mentis are not allowed to vote. Unfortunately, there
are many around who are non-compos-mentis, but have not been legally so
adjudicated. However, by their obvious inablilty to function on a competent
level, they self-adjudicate, so to speak.
My comments have nothing to do with race. I do have reservations about
Darwin Award candidates having a hand in determining my future. If that
makes me a Eugenicist in your eyes, then so be it.
All I'm saying is that if you can't get it together to get something so
simple right the first time, then you don't have the wherewithall to be a
part of the decision making process.
Deej
"justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote in message news:43fe1165@linux...
> speaking of historical aspects... this goes back to your earlier posts:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> news:43fe0b8d@linux...
> > Agreed that it should be orf universal concern. However, thad's
absolutely
> > correct about the historical aspect and the historical aspect is
> > definitely
> > partisan.
> >
> > "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote in message
> > news:43fdfbbc$1@linux...
> >>
> >> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:43fde748$1@linux...
> >>
> >> > BTW - Democrat bellyaching about voter fraud rings rather hollow to
one
> >> > with
> >> > a solid understanding of US electoral history. Capitol D Democratic
> >> > political
> >> > machines all over the East Coast and in Chicago and Ohio regularly
> >> > brokered
> >> > presidential elections with deeply questionable tactics. The current
> >> > Republican
> >> > administrations are using similar tactics to those they suffered for
> > years
> >> > as the minority party. Payback's a bitch.
> >>
> >> Does anyone know the term for making a partisan issue out of an issue
> >> that
> >> should be of universal concern?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Nov 09 00:59:25 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02351 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
