Aircraft safety is important. That's why we let political activists and airlines make FAA rules, shout down anyone who suggests they're not completely and absolutely safe already, denigrate anyone investing an alleged "accident" as a conspiracy theorist, and delete paper trails. Thank God we take elections just as seriously. Why think of the harm that could befall our nation if cabals of the wealthy managed to strongly influence our electoral process.
You know, I just wish this social mind cancer that has befallen US society, where everybody is on some "side" against each other, and talks like you in your comment, would die.
I'm specifically not saying you are "worse" than others. It's more that that is the standard of how we treat each other now. And that is fucked up.
(Call me off-topic, but this matters.)
There is no "left". There is no "right". There are only people. With needs. If they all get what they need, the beef gets buried.
Itâ(TM)s pretty hard to reach consensus with people who strait up do not agree with the laws or their implementation. One group wants for example Voter ID. The other group doesnâ(TM)t (presumably because there is an impression illegal votes favor their side?). We canâ(TM)t have consensus.
I have always felt that voters should be assigned a unique ID known only to the state and the voter. The full register of votes should be public. You should be able to see all the IDs and how they voted,
You may have just done that which you said was impossible.
It took me until middle age to really learn this well, but I learned something a few years ago. (I guess I knew it intellectually before, but it really sank in a few years ago). You said:
> One group wants for example Voter ID. The other group doesn't (presumably because there is an impression illegal votes favor their side?). We can't have consensus.
What I realized a few years ago, and my six year old seems to already know, is that voter ID isn't
Most of what you say is reasonable. You can phrase it another way: systems always have two complementary types of error (known as "type I" and "type II" errors). In this case, a Type-I error would be NOT allowing somebody to vote when they SHOULD be allowed to vote, and a type-II error would be ALLOWING somebody to vote when they should NOT be allowed to vote.
For systems in general, methods reduce type-I errors tends to increase type-II errors, and vice versa. For example, if a system is a switch, and a typ
FYI, none of the groups of people you mentioned are required to show photo ID to vote in Texas. I'm referring to when you said:
> Obtaining ID costs money.. Even if ID is offered for free, voters incur costs such as paying for birth certificates to apply for a government-issued ID. And the travel required is often a major burden on people with disabilities, the elderly, and those in rural areas without access to a car or public transportation.
None of those are an issue, because they don't have to show p
FYI, none of the groups of people you mentioned are required to show photo ID to vote in Texas.
... And do you know why that is?
Because the ACLU sued the State of Texas, and the federal appeals court ruled that the restriction in types of ID discriminated against blacks and hispanics... and that it had been intentionally designed to do so. https://www.npr.org/sections/t... [npr.org] https://www.chicagotribune.com... [chicagotribune.com]
So now that you know what the Texas law actually is, you're going to stop going around saying all the stuff you said in your first post, right? You now know it's all false, if you didn't know that before.
I'm sure you wouldn't go around intentionally spreading lies.
No edit function in Slashdot, I'm afraid. Strike "For example, Texas allows (state issued) concealed weapons permits to be used as ID for voting, but does not accept (state issued) student photo-ID cards or even state employee photo IDs. Why is that?"
Substitute "For example, Texas allowed (state issued) concealed weapons permits to be used as ID for voting, but did not accept (state issued) student photo-ID cards or even state employee photo IDs. Why is that?"
I guess that's technically correct if you want to be Clintonesqe, to be as misleading as possible without *technically lying*.
An honest statement would be that people need to have *something* with their address on it, such as a utility bill, driver's license, welfare check statement, car registration, inmate ID, etc. If a student ID doesn't have your address, it doesn't qualify by itself.
"Technically correct" is an alternate way to say "you're right." Or, to quote Futurama, "technically correct is the best kind of correct".
Texas had put in laws for rigorous voter ID with the intent, not to reduce fraud (no evidence was given that fraud existd) but to suppress voting by blacks and hispanics. The laws were overturned by the courts after a lawsuit, in which the judge ruled that the law wasn't accidentally discriminating against blacks and hispanics, that it had been written with that as a deli
> "Technically correct" is an alternate way to say "you're right." Or, to quote Futurama, "technically correct is the best kind of correct".
If you idolize the sneakiness of "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" politicians and want to be just as dishonest as they are, I guess you can do that.
For myself, I hold myself to a standard slightly higher than that. I try to be honest.
You can decide for yourself what kind of person you want to be.
When you make your mark in the world, watch out for guys with erasers.
-- The Wall Street Journal
Aircraft safety is important (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: Aircraft safety is important (Score:2, Offtopic)
You know, I just wish this social mind cancer that has befallen US society, where everybody is on some "side" against each other, and talks like you in your comment, would die.
I'm specifically not saying you are "worse" than others. It's more that that is the standard of how we treat each other now. And that is fucked up.
(Call me off-topic, but this matters.)
There is no "left". There is no "right".
There are only people. With needs.
If they all get what they need, the beef gets buried.
So, can I make a proposa
Re: Aircraft safety is important (Score:1)
I have always felt that voters should be assigned a unique ID known only to the state and the voter. The full register of votes should be public. You should be able to see all the IDs and how they voted,
Maybe you did the impossible (not what they want) (Score:5, Insightful)
You may have just done that which you said was impossible.
It took me until middle age to really learn this well, but I learned something a few years ago. (I guess I knew it intellectually before, but it really sank in a few years ago). You said:
> One group wants for example Voter ID. The other group doesn't (presumably because there is an impression illegal votes favor their side?). We can't have consensus.
What I realized a few years ago, and my six year old seems to already know, is that voter ID isn't
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of what you say is reasonable. You can phrase it another way: systems always have two complementary types of error (known as "type I" and "type II" errors). In this case, a Type-I error would be NOT allowing somebody to vote when they SHOULD be allowed to vote, and a type-II error would be ALLOWING somebody to vote when they should NOT be allowed to vote.
For systems in general, methods reduce type-I errors tends to increase type-II errors, and vice versa. For example, if a system is a switch, and a typ
Re: (Score:1)
FYI, none of the groups of people you mentioned are required to show photo ID to vote in Texas. I'm referring to when you said:
> Obtaining ID costs money.. Even if ID is offered for free, voters incur costs such as paying for birth certificates to apply for a government-issued ID. And the travel required is often a major burden on people with disabilities, the elderly, and those in rural areas without access to a car or public transportation.
None of those are an issue, because they don't have to show p
Re: (Score:4, Informative)
FYI, none of the groups of people you mentioned are required to show photo ID to vote in Texas.
... And do you know why that is?
Because the ACLU sued the State of Texas, and the federal appeals court ruled that the restriction in types of ID discriminated against blacks and hispanics... and that it had been intentionally designed to do so.
https://www.npr.org/sections/t... [npr.org]
https://www.chicagotribune.com... [chicagotribune.com]
Re: (Score:2)
So now that you know what the Texas law actually is, you're going to stop going around saying all the stuff you said in your first post, right? You now know it's all false, if you didn't know that before.
I'm sure you wouldn't go around intentionally spreading lies.
Re: (Score:2)
No edit function in Slashdot, I'm afraid.
Strike "For example, Texas allows (state issued) concealed weapons permits to be used as ID for voting, but does not accept (state issued) student photo-ID cards or even state employee photo IDs. Why is that?"
Substitute "For example, Texas allowed (state issued) concealed weapons permits to be used as ID for voting, but did not accept (state issued) student photo-ID cards or even state employee photo IDs. Why is that?"
And add: "according to a federal judge, this was
Re:Maybe you did the impossible (not what they wan (Score:2)
I guess that's technically correct if you want to be Clintonesqe, to be as misleading as possible without *technically lying*.
An honest statement would be that people need to have *something* with their address on it, such as a utility bill, driver's license, welfare check statement, car registration, inmate ID, etc. If a student ID doesn't have your address, it doesn't qualify by itself.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess that's technically correct
"Technically correct" is an alternate way to say "you're right." Or, to quote Futurama, "technically correct is the best kind of correct".
Texas had put in laws for rigorous voter ID with the intent, not to reduce fraud (no evidence was given that fraud existd) but to suppress voting by blacks and hispanics. The laws were overturned by the courts after a lawsuit, in which the judge ruled that the law wasn't accidentally discriminating against blacks and hispanics, that it had been written with that as a deli
Re: (Score:2)
> "Technically correct" is an alternate way to say "you're right." Or, to quote Futurama, "technically correct is the best kind of correct".
If you idolize the sneakiness of "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" politicians and want to be just as dishonest as they are, I guess you can do that.
For myself, I hold myself to a standard slightly higher than that.
I try to be honest.
You can decide for yourself what kind of person you want to be.