Settings and activity
6 results found
-
1,121 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment An error occurred while saving the comment 
vontrapp
commented
Every single piece of election software should be 100% open. Not open source per se, but the code, all code, should be reviewable by anyone. As for companies that already have code, they can sell the code to 'the people' or it's not used. I guess it's up to the states whether they pay the price the company is asking for the code, or to seek elsewhere.
vontrapp
supported this idea
·
-
6,179 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment vontrapp
commented
As for privacy, simply don't make available sensitive information. Open, here, does not mean "make everything available." It means those things you do make available, and those things that _should_ be available, make them available in a open (available, parse able, free of charge) _format_. The access to the data should, of course, be free as well.
An error occurred while saving the comment vontrapp
commented
Calle, that's the whole point. It matters little what the actual "standard" is or even that it's "standard" between government entities. If we simply have OPEN specs then any programmer can simply and easily transform it into ANY other OPEN standard. Again, open means exactly what you described it should mean.
vontrapp
supported this idea
·
-
4 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment vontrapp
commented
Physical medium includes wireless (airspace is public property). If you want to restrict what ISPs can do, that should be a separate ticket. Also part of being content neutral means allowing anyone willing to pay the price the opportunity to use your network (infrastructure). Thus, no more one ISP for one network. IOW no conflict of interest.
vontrapp
shared this idea
·
-
13,736 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment vontrapp
commented
ISPs can provide service any way they want, provided it is made plainly known in contract. They can even charge more for traffic that leaves their own domain (location based prioritization) so long as it's contractually clear. If video gets throttled and people want video, someone will provide it. Will it cost more? Sure. Is that because it is more expensive to deliver video? Of course.
An error occurred while saving the comment vontrapp
commented
I urge you all to be careful about this issue. I believe network neutrality is important. First of all, how is "ensure internet widely available" any better than all the other entitlement nonsense we see all around us?? Secondly, I propose that yes, the network be neutral, but that we leave ISPs alone. This will in some cases require separating the interests of ISP/network conglomerates.
-
8,888 votesvontrapp
supported this idea
·
-
10,648 votesvontrapp
supported this idea
·
Yes, elections are handled locally. But we could have a simple, straightforward law that simply says "any software on any election equipment used for federal elections must be public property, the source thereof freely available and accessible." This would leave the states still free to use any systems they feel are best, with one needed but not at all difficult requirement.