MS was handed something to sign, it signed it. If there are distribution limitations on the thing signed, that is not MS's problem, because MS IS NOT DISTRIBUTING IT.
They are distributing it to you when they give it back to you after signing. At that point, the GPL3 specifies that MS must also give you the key.
When you distribute it further, you must then pass that key on to anyone you distribute to.
Technically, yes, but the reason they don't want to is because if they did, they would be forced to distribute signing keys to everyone who ever installed that binary, which would sort of ruin the security of the system, as a rootkit developer could just grab a key too.
Each to their own mate.
I agree: Everyone should drink mate tea, not this coffee or beer nonsense.
I've gotta agree with the other guy, that's the dumbest thing I've heard all week.
The high cost in volunteer time. Just because volunteers are paying those costs, doesn't mean they don't exist. And it isn't a good excuse to take advantage of them.
You can't afford an afternoon every few years to keep your political system running well?
How do you ensure that you have volunteers from "all" sides of the political spectrum instead of just "both" sides?
I don't. That's up to everyone to do for themselves. If you don't volunteer, you have nobody to blame but yourself.
"Coercion" is a very specific word here. It means forcing someone to vote for a certain candidate. This is something a democratic voting system must eliminate to be reliable.
"GO vote for Mitt Romney, or we'll break your fucking knee caps," seems to work regardless of the voting method used.
That is why voting is private. You can threaten someone to go vote some way all you want, but you have no way of knowing if they did or not.
That is not the case for remote voting, where you can stand next to them and make sure they vote the way you want.
Having the vote on a workday is completely insane to start with.
And why audit to detect something when you can just prevent it in the first place?
Anything that is not voting in person is susceptible to coercion, and thus not a reliable method for democratic voting.
Vote count delays?
If done right, it doesn't take more than evening by hand.
Issues with recounts?
What issues?
The ease in which paper votes can be "lost" in transit to the counting facility?
They are to be counted on location, not transported anywhere.
That is subject to coercion, and thus not usable as a voting method.
How about the high cost of counting ballots by hand?
What high costs? You volunteer to do it.
And one more time: they are not a safeguard against fraud.
Having multiple volunteer workers from all sides of the political spectrum is.
You don't use a machine, and you don't hire people. You take multiple volunteers who count in public.
If Apple wanted to do that, they could do it right away. It has nothing whatsoever to do with what processor they use.
They also haven't done that, even though they could.
The only problem I really see is them forcing you to buy an ARM version of certain Apps and an Intel version separately.
If anything, the App Store forces the opposite.
If all else fails, lower your standards.
