Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: I used to be totally against online voting... (Score 1) 77

by ClarkMills (#48238563) Attached to: Study: New Jersey e-Vote Experiment After Sandy a Disaster

My main bitch with online voting was/is vote-buying. This *could* be mostly solved by having it so that you can change your vote right up to closing time. That way, even if you sold your vote and voted in front of the vote-buyer, you could always go and change your vote later. Dispels any significant incentive to even try that rort.

We first need to get an e-voting system in place that is trustworthy (and hence open/auditable).

+ - Digital noise in photos gives away edits->

Submitted by ClarkMills
ClarkMills (515300) writes "Here's a neat paper outlining the detection of digital photographs by detecting and comparing the noise across the image. There's more information at (the humorously named site) http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/07/09/Research-uses-noise-patterns-to-detect-manipulated-images It will be interesting to run this tech across previous "winner" images. :)"
Link to Original Source

"An entire fraternity of strapping Wall-Street-bound youth. Hell - this is going to be a blood bath!" -- Post Bros. Comics

Working...