Show friends/colleagues a program I wrote to make task X easier

...

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequential_proportional_approval_voting).
regist.ra.rs
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

even in technology, the scum rises to the top

Steve Jobs - Oct 5, 2011
Dennis Ritchie - Oct 12, 2011

Fuck, still hurts.

What's the deal with so many people on leftypol saying they are programmers and not a single one of them makes a damn thing for the left? I want my commie programs.

You could be the next Glushkov.

Let me tell ya ya smug cunt.
This leaves us only time to create smaller programmers like the one OP describes
And the last point
If you got a good idea that is reasonable in scope, I'll be glad to hear it.

Like a facebook with a with a casual games corner with inbuilt translation services that is also a youtube with twitter and gmail and also a MMORPG.

Seriously, just apps for things like polls and running meetings. I know there are lots of web services for that, but they collect data about you. There are also lots of ideas in voting systems that I haven't seen an online/app implementation of.

A polling software could show the voter a ballot with checkboxes for each candidate (or thing), but instead of just displaying the approval winner, the result could show all sorts of patterns. So the poll could be used in the middle of a discussion rather than showing a final decision.

One formula for finding patterns could be something like Thiele's sequential proportional approval voting, proposed a century ago (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequential_proportional_approval_voting). Another way to look at and present the data would be to show whether there are particular pairs where people who vote for one thing are very unlikely to vote for the other, though I believe that has a rather whimsical value compared to the Thiele thing above, which could be used to shrink down a list of competing proposals for further more intense consideration, as well as other uses (I can imagine using Sequential Thiele for handing out gold, silver, bronze prizes by an art committee, for instance).

Right…

As for polling software, thats not too fun to do. And by definition, polling websites collect your data to prevent vote manipulation and, you know, store your vote.

So you basically just want a voting site with ability to do calculations with the resulting data? This has all sorts of privacy implications though, since you need to store who voted and what they voted, in order to be able to do meaningful calculations on the collected data.

I feel it.
Jobs did literally nothing. Fucking hell.

It should not be a site running a service, it would be a program for download. And I'm not even thinking about privacy in the sense of secret votes. The privacy would be protected in the sense that the data would not need to be shared with anybody outside the organisation using the software, the software would be something the organisation could obtain and use without relying on some third-party-server.

So I've got to be entirely honest with you. I don't really see much of a use for software like this.

For accessibility it would be best if it ran on a webserver. But I just don't see much use for it for the effort it requires.

To setup something like this you would need to do some pretty tech minded shit (relatively, port forwarding, hosting a server, installing dependencies). The problem and use cases you describe seem really specific. Honestly, thinking about its uses makes me feel like making such specific voting software is a waste of time, since if people really wanted such a thing and they were capable of doing the setup of it, they could just pull something together themselves. And in situation where information is really sensitive, they won't trust some shitty voting software anyway, and just go with a more trusted one or internal development. In other cases people would just use public sites like poalme.

How about this?

Install Gentoo.

This.

Tfw my old highscool has posters of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates up as "great computer scientists".

...

Sounds interesting but I dont understand the last one TBH.

I wrote and run a file-uploading service: regist.ra.rs (I apologize for the self promotion.)

While there is nothing intrinsically left about it, I guarantee that I won't delete leftists data. Right-wing, could corrupt itself by chance.

I use it to publically upload books fron 8ch, since the url is nicer than a direct link to an anonymous right-wing/gamer/anime/weeb forum.

BTW. if anyone has any suggestion on hoanto improve it or make it "more left wing" (since most pomf clones/anonymous file uploading serivces are run by right wingers).

So install Linux.

Daily reminder that Tim Bernes Lee refused to patent WWW coz it would resulted in a collection of intranets and not the global internet he hoped for

there's literally an entire movement dedicated to free and open source software which is based around subverting the institution of private property.

doesnt that make you corrupt

As a metaphor, think of a PSVita using bitcoin to control 3D-printed drones in the cloud.
It's two rounds of open approval voting. Approval voting normally means this: You get ballots and secret voting, the ballots look like they usually do in plurality, but now you are allowed to mark any number of competing proposals as approved instead of just a single one. The proposal receiving most approval marks in total is the winner.

This version is different in that each voter basically gets two approval ballots. Again, the proposal receiving most approval marks in total is the winner. So, unlike with normal approval voting, you can give each competing proposal zero, one, or two marks.

So, the question comes up: Why not just give each voter one ballot that allows you to give any proposal zero, one, or two thumbs up? Wouldn't that be the same? The answer is no. Or rather, it would be the same if the proposal had everybody literally getting paper ballots to fill out, with all data being secret until after everybody voting. But here instead, the phone or tablet is passed around and when you get it you see how many marks each proposal at the moment has.

Your actual true preferences can be more complicated than three different levels, it can be a full ranking. But allowing you to give up to three or four thumbs up or stars or whatever wouldn't result in people making much use of subtle distinctions. It is a sensible strategy to vote at extremes only, so your vote has a better chance of having the effect you want (remember when Youtube had star ratings and almost everybody used only the extreme ends?). You squeeze your real preferences into a, if you will, semi-honest binary pattern. But where do you make the strategically sound cut between what you support and what you don't support? To have some decent information about that, you as a voter get to see the voting tally.

With only one voting round, early voters would be disadvantaged here, as later voters have more information to inform their strategy. So there are two voting rounds, and the person who had the last turn in the first round is the one who has the first turn in the second round. Everybody's average turn position is the same. With well-informed strategic voters, approval voting and average ratings have a very strong tendency to elect the Condorcet winner (the one that would win every voting "duel" against another proposal), if such a proposal exists .


I'm sure everybody in this thread has already heard about GNU/Linux and various Free software projects.