I'm a laptop serial killer...

*gazes over stacks of dead laptops and random computer parts*

Sometimes I masturbate all over these carcasses. I mean, no. I don't. Ever.

Do that...

If only I had been born with the simple desire to learn electronics...

-- Instead, I was born a luddite into an era of technocracy that my feeble, easily offended, confused and aggressive mind cannot comprehend.

Now I am destined to commit predatory electronic abuse on a daily abuse.

*punches monitor, tears it from the computer, screams into the night and throws it crushed and dying into the heap*

ELECTRONICS!!! AGHHHHH..! The pure and total ANGUISH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*runs screaming out of the house, operates overheating vehicle 100,000 miles over the recommended oil change sticker reminder to the nearest best buy; purchases something using money like its arcade credits; drives home and plugs the heathen VGI cable into its oozing port*

Please... kill me.

The problem with electronic voting is that it makes it really hard to draw a cock'n'balls on the ballot paper.

From an outsiders view it looks like the choices are extreme corporate insanity vs well spoken extreme corporate abuse.

Not that it's much better where I live, it's always a choice between the terrible party and the slightly less terrible party. And voting is more about voting out the worse party, rather than picking a party that you actually like.

Electronic voting makes the democratic process untrustworthy.

Any voting that can not be anonymous and supervised by all interested parties, any kind of "magic black box" with no paper record will be hacked and misused and should not be trusted.

Also Watergate was a scandal for the party doing the breaking-in. Nowadays it seems the other way round.

Also no-one in their right mind would hack Trumps mails. What worse could he write than what he says? What difference would it make if we knew?

One possible silver lining, this may make "them" more concerned about the electronic voting machines being hacked, which has been a concern since they were first introduced. There's a real chance that a foreign country might actually control the results, with no way to ever be sure, since there's no paper trail.

Talking to a conspiracy theorist about either the moon landing or the flat earth theory is exasperating. They discredit a scientific theory on the slightest technicality in your brief retelling of it, but if you baulk at their vague one-sentence alternative you're brainwashed.

You can tell them about the retroreflectors, or the satellite images we have of the landing site. You can tell them about sundials, the phases of the moon or constellations.

They don't care - anything can be faked and their definition of "proof" boils down to seeing it with their own naked eye.

It's totally impractical to take everyone up in a Red Bull balloon to see the curvature of the Earth for themselves. Presumably you'd have to take everyone up twice at two locations to show that the circular horizon is not an edge. Or kill two birds with one stone and take them to the moon landing site and back again because nothing less will suffice.

Because if I take them to the most advanced telescope in the world and focus it on the moon landing site - the image could be faked. You could show them how the telescope works, but each component could produce a faked output. The only way they would accept the telescope information is if they built it themselves from raw materials - oh you used a standard electronic device such as a basic motor? Illuminati dude, that thing can produce EM waves that fake the image. You're going to use a Macbook to read the USB output? Are you a shill?

Literally nothing is good enough but they are all, without exception, too fucking lazy to go and prove it to themselves from first principles.

Which is called "getting a degree in physics", where you are also taught to question every step, AKA being "brainwashed".

An indicator of a developed nation is electronic bus signs, but London has transcended past that into the artesian phase of development.

I love this guy, but worry about showing it to my 12 year old son, who is really into electronics... I'd have to preface it with, "don't try this stuff, he's taking serious precautions that may not be seen, plus he knows a lot of what he's doing. When you reach his age and become the electrical engineer you want to be, then do these things... but not the eyebrow thing."

*promote your history of electronics and entertainment!

I was not talking about Vantablack in my comments. I was talking about other, older hydrophobic coatings.

Also, I'm fairly sure they bond the nanotubes with something to make them stick and stay in place. Pure nanotubes are just a powder, they would not act like paint. Nanotubes are not a new discovery and have been used in consumer products already, mostly electronics, google it.

As an NZ resident, I am morally obliged to point out that Australia is a horrible place populated by criminals and terrible rugby teams, but I did live there for two years and in reality, it's not actually that bad.

Yes, their government are a shower of complete dickheads both in their own right and in the fact that they have their collective head shoved so far up Americas arse they can practically see the back of uncle sams tonsils. The immigration policy is pretty much barbaric and they seem hellbent on ruining the country as fast as humanly possible. And I haven't even gotten started on how unbelievably racist the country as a whole is (this is a country that only got rid of it's "White Australia Policy" in the 70s).

Border security, while they can be complete arseholes are not nearly as bad as they're portrayed on those TV shows. They do have a lot of idiots flouting the biosecurity laws (Johnny Depp is the least of their problems), but in general as long as you don't make the mistake of not being white, they're far more interested in any fruit you might have than any bills with coke on them. (side note: don't bring cash to Australia, almost every transaction is electronic there).

But the country itself has some great things going for it. Some of the scenery is amazing, the parts of the reef that aren't bleached are stunning, the food in the cities is amazing (as is the coffee, especially in Melbourne and Sydney).

Yes, we clearly disagree about independent voters' responsibilities. That's fine. Just know that when you assign blame, many won't accept it.

Yes, I also hope current poll numbers and trends reverse....unless Sanders IS the nominee, in which case I hope current poll numbers remain the same.

What? What argument? Instead of answering? I discussed your two suggestions, and offered two of my own, one being (I think) a more palatable alternative to your tax proposal for steadying markets, the other being campaign reform. To quote myself...
"Tax on investment transactions...you've GOT to be kidding, she'll never consider any such thing, it goes against her own, and her donors interests. A speed limit on trading info so everyone has an equal chance would work better.
The one you didn't mention is the MOST important in my eyes, and also a non starter from her or them....campaign reform...both finance AND how elections operate from districts to electronic voting machines and everything in between."
Is that an argument? It certainly wasn't meant as one.
It was meant as simple and fairly civil (if slightly snarky) answers to your question (answers that I guess you missed), with a note that IMO, my (and likely your) preferred planks are not going to be addressed acceptably by Clinton, and clear reasons why I think that. That was not meant to start an argument, I'm sorry you take it that way.

No, I don't think I said that. Again, it would be nice, but if she locks it up (not counting super delegates) then Bernie's run as a Democrat is over, as is all hope. I don't hold onto even a shred of hope that he'll sway her policy, no matter what he gets her to say during the election.
She's already been incredibly inconsistent on the minimum wage thing, actually taking 3 positions in one sentence in one debate. Can't trust her.
Tax on investment transactions...you've GOT to be kidding, she'll never consider any such thing, it goes against her own, and her donors interests.
A speed limit on trading info so everyone has an equal chance would work better.
The one you didn't mention is the MOST important in my eyes, and also a non starter from her or them....campaign reform...both finance AND how elections operate from districts to electronic voting machines and everything in between. Without that, we'll never get candidates that will work for us OR fix the system that supports them, or even be able to trust our elections. As I see it, Sanders is our one and only hope of fixing the system, so the only hope of saving the union.

OK...first, keep in mind this is the PRIMARY, not the election. Rules are designed by the individual parties.
In CA, for Democrats, it's an open primary, meaning Democrats and non affiliated voters may vote in the Democratic primary. Many primaries are closed, meaning only people registered in the specific party may vote in it's primary...I think the Republicans do that in Ca.
In many cases, if there's a question about someone being allowed to vote in a primary, usually in closed primaries, like all the people that had registered Democrat but had been re-registered as Republican or Independent in NY were still allowed to vote, but only on 'provisional' ballots. In this way, they fulfil the legal requirements of allowing them to vote, but still find a way to never count that vote, skewing the results...in this election skewing them for Clinton in every case, independents are not voting for her.
Provisional ballots exist so they can 1)have a way to allow people to vote when there's a question about them being 'properly registered', fulfilling their legal obligation and 2)so they can discard those votes if they wish. It is insane to me that they only have to allow the voter to vote, but are not required to ever COUNT that vote....a vote isn't a vote unless it's counted.

Yes, our system is totally broken. It was already seriously damaged, then electronic voting and Citizens United happened and the entire system is now an untrustworthy cash and carry commercial system paid for and controlled by <40 people.
At least that's how I understand it.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Why-Electronic-Voting-is-a-BAD-Idea

Why Electronic Voting is a BAD Idea has been added as a related post - related requested by mxxcon.