No one is required to cast a vote for everything on the ballot. Not voting for a certain office/question/proposition/etc is called an "undervote". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

> OK, it turns out that it's only some, not most, jurisdictions that restrict write-ins. Here's an informative page:

Scratch that. Looks like most states have restrictions.

OK, it turns out that it's only some, not most, jurisdictions that restrict write-ins. Here's an informative page:

http://www.anamericanvision.co...

Note that there are seven states which do not allow write-ins for president at all.

> In the US you can always write in a candidate of your choosing. Now, some people like to protest vote for Mickey Mouse, or various other inanimate objects. However if you were to vote for someone who was eligible to run who was not on the ballot, and they pulled in more votes than anyone else, they would be the winner.

YMMV. In many jurisdictions (if not most) there is a list of pre-qualified write in candidates. I shit you not. Google "qualified write-in list" (with the quotes) for a bunch of examples. Sure, you can write in anyone you want, but if they are not on the list, it will not get counted.

Here is one example, from San Francisco: (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/11/05/18725142.php)

For voters who wish to cast their vote for candidates other than the ones printed on the ballot in San Francisco-- they need to know that they are still limited to a few official write-in candidate names if their vote is to be counted.

> you agree to by being born into a society, that by doing so, you agree to abide by that societies rules.

I have no doubt you actually believe that horseshit. That statement makes some of the more hilarious proclaimations Christians are so fond of saying seem rational and reasonable in comparison.

Yeah I'd like some more meat to the story as well. Amazon Glacier achieves its pricing by using low-RPM consumer drives plugged into some sort of high-density backplanes; supposedly they are so densely packed that you can only spin up a few drives at once due to power and heat issues. Hence the delay.

I assume Google is doing something similar, maybe with somewhat better power or cooling since they're offering faster retrieval times which implies that perhaps they can spin up a higher percentage of drives at a time.

One year vaper, previously 20 year smoker. I've had the medical labs done to show how much damage was undone in just one year.

At 41, I can run farther and faster, keep up with young folk better than most of my non-smoker friends of the same age. 3 years ago this was not the case.

I hear that. I have 1mb/s myself, although it is not shared. If I see one more nimrod here bitching about "ridiclously absurd upload speeds of 25mbs" or some such, I think I'm going to have to shoot somebody.

TFA article says nothing of the sort, actually. It's TF submitter. Slashdot, of course, simply copy-pastes anything Hugh says.

Beyond the fact that I was obviously referring to Slashdot calling it a "mini-internet", the article said no such thing. They said that they can't keep it secret. Not that they "do not wish" to keep it secret.

AP Headline: "Cuban youth build secret computer network despite Wi-Fi ban "

Slashdot: "Young Cubans Set Up Mini-Internet".

"Mini-Internet" huh, Slashdot. My how far this site has degraded, when the mass media's headline are more accurate and less pandering.

You're right. From now on I'll refer to them using terms more appropriate for them. "Fags".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

How do you think a cop infiltrating a gang like, for example, the Hells Angels, gains their trust?

Also, and undercover cop can smoke a bowl with you and still arrest your ass for having/selling/using.