Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



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: Re:"We"? (Score 1) 302

by sommere (#40566767) Attached to: US Election Year, Still No Voting Reform

MN has paper ballots and also has automatic recounts of random precincts within each county regardless of the vote margin. We have had two major state wide recounts in recent years and both have been successful - they have been transparent and fully auditable.

http://www.ceimn.org/ceimn-state-recount-laws-searchable-database/states/Minnesota

There are other issues about whether certain people are eligible to vote, and how to handle that on election day and what to do if it is later determined that someone who shouldn't have voted did vote. (Answer: not much you can do, since their vote is anonymous... BUT there are VERY VERY few cases where this happens and is discovered.)

Classic Games (Games)

Researchers Reprogram Voting Machine To Run Pac-man 132

Posted by samzenpus
from the vote-cherry-this-year dept.
Philom writes "Numerous scientific studies have demonstrated that electronic voting machines can be reprogrammed to steal votes, so when researchers Alex Halderman and Ari Feldman got their hands on a machine called the Sequoia AVC Edge, they decided to do something different: they reprogrammed it to run Pac-Man. As states move away from insecure electronic voting, there's a risk that discarded machines will clog our landfills. Fortunately, these results show that voting machines can be recycled to provide countless hours of entertainment."
The Courts

+ - Has RIAA expert Jacobson contradicted himself?-> 1

Submitted by
NewYorkCountryLawyer
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "A year and five months after examining the defendant's hard drive in UMG v. Lindor, the RIAA's "expert" witness, Dr. Doug Jacobson, has issued a "supplemental report" which appears to contradict his earlier "reports" alluding to the hard drive inspection. In view of the superb job the Slashdot community and the Groklaw community did in helping first to prepare for, and then to vet, Jacobson's deposition, I humbly submit for your learned review the now three (3) versions of the "expert's" opinions based on the hard drive, for your analysis. As with almost all federal litigation documents nowadays, they are, unfortunately, in *pdf format: (a) December 19, 2006, declaration; (b) unsigned October 25, 2006, report, awaiting approval from RIAA lawyers; and (c) December 15, 2007, version. The initial observations of commentators on my blog are located here."
Link to Original Source

When some people discover the truth, they just can't understand why everybody isn't eager to hear it.

Working...