![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sombrefanhalf day at work, felt crappy so came home.
1) Originally for the 100th Angel episode it was Buffy who was to set Angel back on the right path and not Cordelia (however SMG turned down the chance of an appearance). If this had happened, do you think it would have worked at all?
2) If the allegations are true, in your own opinion was it right for the British government to bug Kofi Annan, the UN chief, during the run upto the Iraqi war?
3) Dirty Dancing: Havana nights. Are you going to go and see the sequel set in Cuba in 1958?
4) Why is some people refuse to believe the truth even though it's blindingly obvious what is going on? (e.g. Angel aint getting saved, the show is dead)
5)There's been recent stories in the US press and indeed the UK press about the viability of electronic voting (i.e. wide open to hackers and poorly written source code etc). So what's wrong with just marking X on a ballot paper instead of using mechanical or electronic machines?
1) Originally for the 100th Angel episode it was Buffy who was to set Angel back on the right path and not Cordelia (however SMG turned down the chance of an appearance). If this had happened, do you think it would have worked at all?
2) If the allegations are true, in your own opinion was it right for the British government to bug Kofi Annan, the UN chief, during the run upto the Iraqi war?
3) Dirty Dancing: Havana nights. Are you going to go and see the sequel set in Cuba in 1958?
4) Why is some people refuse to believe the truth even though it's blindingly obvious what is going on? (e.g. Angel aint getting saved, the show is dead)
5)There's been recent stories in the US press and indeed the UK press about the viability of electronic voting (i.e. wide open to hackers and poorly written source code etc). So what's wrong with just marking X on a ballot paper instead of using mechanical or electronic machines?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Answers....
Date: 2004-02-27 08:38 am (UTC)2) No.
3) Nope.
4) There's a principle in psychology called selective reinforcement. If an action ALWAYS gets results (e.g. a mouse pushes a button for food), it'll be ceased almost immediately if the results stop. By contrast, if the action works SOMETIMES (e.g. the once when a bunch of bottles of tabasco sauce caused UPN to take Roswell) the test subject will keep trying through many more failures. That and some of these people are probably young and naive. :-/
5) If I push a button on the screen and it says "Are you sure you want to vote for Howard Dean" and I push yes, there is no question of me possibly making a mistake. It would, of course help if ballots could be simple (unlike that butterfly garbage) but people can ALWAYS find SOME way to mess up any instructions you give them about a paper ballot. Hell, my local ballot for city council is pretty complicated with rank order preferences for an instant runoff format. Also, there's an argument over which system is harder to tamper with. In principle, a malicious county official could go through and mark a second option on some ballots, functionally voiding votes they don't like. But then, there have been studies on the electronic systems and they're pretty easy to hack - in fact in one case the current returns were accessible to the public before the polls had closed, which could give a candidate big advantages in terms of where to focus their get out the vote efforts.....