Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(I bought _one_ lottery ticket, for $1, just to see how the numbers were
done. Lotteries are of course a tax on the gullible and stupid.)
A friend of mine likes to say that lotteries are a tax on stupidity: The
dumber you are, the more tax you have to pay.
On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 04:06 AM, Peter Gutmann wrote:
Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(I bought _one_ lottery ticket, for $1, just to see how the numbers
were
done. Lotteries are of course a tax on the gullible and stupid.)
A friend of mine likes to say that lotteries are a tax on
Major Variola (ret) wrote:
Currently voting is trusted because political adversaries supervise the
process.
Previously the mechanics were, well, mechanical, ie, open for
inspection.
That really is worth saying more often.
If we here can't agree on how to make machine voting both robust
and
Variola (ret); [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Chaumian blinding public voting?
On Friday 31 October 2003 12:10 pm, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
Is is possible to use blinding (or other protocols) so that all votes
are published, you can check that your vote is in there, and you
(or anyone) can run
On Monday, November 3, 2003, at 02:44 AM, ken wrote:
Major Variola (ret) wrote:
Currently voting is trusted because political adversaries supervise
the
process.
Previously the mechanics were, well, mechanical, ie, open for
inspection.
That really is worth saying more often.
If we here can't
On Monday, November 3, 2003, at 02:44 AM, ken wrote:
If we here can't agree on how to make machine voting both robust and
private, then EVEN IF A PERFECT SYSTEM COULD BE DESIGNED it is
extremely unlikely that a large number of people could be persuaded
that it /was/ perfect.
So if public
On Friday 31 October 2003 10:55 pm, Tim May wrote:
.. (Standard Tim May Anyone who doesn't agree with me deserves to die a
horrible death rant) ...
--Tim May
I figured that was coming.
Chuckle.
--
Neil Johnson
http://www.njohnsn.com
PGP key available on request.
On Friday 31 October 2003 12:10 pm, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
Is is possible to use blinding (or other protocols) so that all votes
are published, you can check that your vote is in there, and you
(or anyone) can run the maths and verify the vote? Without being
able to link people to votes
On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 23:55, Tim May wrote:
Increasing voter turnout is, of course, a Bad Thing. For the reasons we
discuss so often.
Agreed. To the extent that I want a government at all, I support a
constitutional republic, not a democracy. Legions of bleary-eyed,
TV-addled, bigoted
First, much thanks to Howie Goodell for his reply.
(Note that printing stuff on transparencies was proposed
(by Shamir?) some time ago, perhaps for quorum-required info.)
At 09:17 PM 10/31/03 -0600, Neil Johnson wrote:
On Friday 31 October 2003 12:10 pm, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
Is is
Hello --
David Chaum has a new system that is an optical one-time pad. It requires a
printer that prints squares on both sides of a transparent 2-layer ballot. To
the voter it looks like ordinary printing with a solid black border. Then s/he
separates the layers, hands one in for counting
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Tim May wrote:
Or should we just add 20 of the remaining 30 list subscribers here to
the list of 25 million in these united states who need to be sent up
the chimneys? Works for me.
Do we actually have 30 subscribers left?
--
Yours,
J.A. Terranson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Friday, October 31, 2003, at 07:17 PM, Neil Johnson wrote:
On Friday 31 October 2003 12:10 pm, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
Is is possible to use blinding (or other protocols) so that all votes
are published, you can check that your vote is in there, and you
(or anyone) can run the maths and
13 matches
Mail list logo
