Several sites are noticing a joke (for now) petition for Denmark to take pesky California off the US' hands:
Have you ever looked at a map and thought, "You know what Denmark needs? More sunshine, palm trees, and roller skates." Well, we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to make that dream a reality.
Let's buy California from Donald Trump!
Yes, you heard that right.
California could be ours, and we need your help to make it happen.
See also English language articles like "Danes offer to buy California to spite Trump's Greenland aims: 'We'll bring hygge to Hollywood'" at The Guardian and "Petition for Denmark to buy California for $1 trillion surpasses 200,000 signatures" at CBS, among others.
I think we need a "Humor" topic. Can you better this?
(Score: 5, Funny) by DadaDoofy on Saturday February 15, @09:48PM (14 children)
I'm pretty sure there are at least 70 million people in the US who would support paying Denmark to take California.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 15, @10:16PM
(Score: 4, Insightful) by r1348 on Saturday February 15, @11:58PM
Consider a donation then, I'm sure most californians would love free healthcare.
(Score: 4, Touché) by turgid on Sunday February 16, @10:23AM (11 children)
Well they were stupid enough to vote for Trump.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 16, @10:57AM (10 children)
> Well they were stupid enough to vote for Trump.
Are you sure? He did call in advance many times that the election was going to be rigged. Both computer security and voting process experts have decried for decades the total lack of auditability and security in the "voting" machines. The lack of any kind of accountability has been the provided years of debate in certain computer circles:
https://defcon.org/html/defcon-27/dc-27-villages.html#voting [defcon.org]
But the topic has never gained traction with the secretaries of state, let alone the federal government.
Take that into account as you recall his warning about an inside angle on the election and that less than a week and a half before the results would be counted as good as all the broligarchs pivoted to back him fully and publicly prior to the pretend vote tallies.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Sunday February 16, @12:26PM (9 children)
There are enough conspiracy theories going about these days. I'll go with the simplest explanation, human stupidity.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 16, @12:39PM (8 children)
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 16, @02:22PM (7 children)
> the machines simply don't have the capability for auditing ...
Pure BS -- we vote here in NY State by marking on paper which is then scanned for a quick tally. If a recount is needed all the paper ballots are saved in the secure box below the scanner.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 16, @02:34PM (4 children)
> ... we vote here in NY State by marking on paper which is then scanned for a quick tally.
And just how do you propose verifying the accuracy of the 'quick tally' there? Run it through the scanner again?
This is a solved problem since long ago. Hand counting is the only way to guarantee accurate, auditable results for the foreseeable future.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by pTamok on Sunday February 16, @03:28PM (3 children)
Nope.
It has been demonstrated multiple times that hand-counting has a higher error rate than automated tallying. It is also slower .
People get tired and miscount, or don't notice two sheets of paper stuck together, or interpet ambiguous marks in different ways, or add up incorrectly, or put bundles in the wrong pile etc. Machines have other error modes. The end result is that humans have a greater error rate.
Following well-defined processes helps, especially if auditing and cross-checking is part of the process. There are many years of experience available to get things as good as possible, but well-implemented automation can be significantly better.
Of course , badly implemented automation can be worse than humans. The skill is knowing the difference.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 16, @04:20PM (1 child)
Experts agree on the necessity of hand counted paper ballots:
https://verifiedvoting.org/ [verifiedvoting.org]
It may hurt the feelings of those emotionally vested in specific technologies or in the alleged outcome of specific elections, but the sad fact is that the machines are flawed even as a concept and trivial to hack:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/18/american-elections-hack-bruce-scheier [theguardian.com]
The problem is not new, it goes back to even before when George W. Bush was appointed in 2000.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by pTamok on Sunday February 16, @09:37PM
Some experts agree. Other experts, who have conducted and published scientific studies, don't.
Press Release: Science Daily, Rice University (2012-02-12): Hand counts of votes may cause errors [sciencedaily.com]
Link to actual paper, free to read: Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy Vol. 11, No. 1 (Published Online: 5 March 2012)-- Post-Election Auditing: Effects of Procedure and Ballot Type on Manual Counting Accuracy, Efficiency, and Auditor Satisfaction and Confidence [doi.org]
Your link to Bruce Schneier's commentary is about inappropriate reliance on, and use of technology. I agree completely that some implementations of 'voting machines' are terrible and an invitation to hacking and fraud. However, that said, well designed automation, done by people who understand computer security and voting systems, can result in systems that are better than hand counting. Just using machines and hoping for the best is not the approach I suggest.
The 'Verified Voting' website says this about voting:
I do not advocate relying solely on machines, and agree with 'Verified Voting' with regard to use of paper ballots.
I agree.
Could not agree more.
And a link (not open access, unfortunately) from the 'Verified Voting' website page here on hand-counting: https://verifiedvoting.org/election-system/hand-counted-paper-ballots/ [verifiedvoting.org]
Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and PolicyVol. 17, No. 2 (Published Online: 1 June 2018) -- Learning from Recounts [doi.org]
Paper ballots, reviewed by the voter before submission, counted by automated optical scanning, is a process that probably has the fewest errors. It can be audited by hand-counting the paper ballots afterwards, if deemed necessary, but the hand counting is likely to be less accurate. For extremely close contests, that makes a difference.
A paper trail of votes that can be audited (slowly) by hand-counting (if necessary) after (fast) automated optical scanning looks to be a reasonable system. Reliance solely on hand-counting isn't.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by Lester on Sunday February 16, @05:34PM
Human error may be higher in number of errors, but computer error may be bigger.
Human error may be a ballot or two up or down. And probably, errors cancel one each other.
But computers can be hacked and make a difference. You don't face only misfunction, but human interference.
There are more incentives to hack an election than to hack a bank for 100 millions dollars.
Unless election is decided by ten votes, human counting is more trustworthy than computers.
(Score: 2) by tbuskey on Sunday February 16, @03:32PM (1 child)
And Massachusetts and NH. I think NH has a requirement for a paper ballot
In MA, ballots get passed through one scanner and they have a 2nd scanner they get run through to verify.
If you have an error on the ballot you submitted, it gets flagged. I don't remember if they give you a chance to destroy it & redo a new ballot.
They can go to another voting precinct in town and use their scanners. Or another town's scanner.
Scanning is quick, reliable, repeatable and distributed
The tech is used to score tests (SAT & other tests) so its not exclusive to voting machines. That probably keeps costs down more,
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 16, @04:00PM
> In MA, ballots get passed through one scanner and they have a 2nd scanner they get run through to verify.
Would both scanners happen to be encumbered with the same brand / model / version of mystery source scanning software?
A point or two here or there can make all the difference, especially when combined with propaganda, social media, and lack of education. That's what it's all about, a point here or there, just enough to not look suspicious.
Without auditability who knows? He controls the scanner source controls the tally. Open source would be ostensibly controlled by the people and not by a corporation whose CEO pledged to deliver a specific election to a specific candidate.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Saturday February 15, @10:18PM (4 children)
Does laughing at these authoritarian idiots help stop the madness? I guess maybe a little. Why else did Jon Stewart come back?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by hopdevil on Saturday February 15, @10:20PM
He doesn't seem that effective
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 15, @10:23PM
Probably doesn't help stop the madness, but makes me feel better while I'm hunkered down for the next four years of Calvinball (to quote an earlier post I saw here).
Just don't lose sight of the ball--there's going to be continuous smoke/mirrors/distractions--while the real damage to most of us is hidden until it's too late.
(Score: 3, Touché) by c0lo on Saturday February 15, @10:31PM
When Canadians stop buying Kentucky bourbon [yahoo.com], Mitch McConnell starts flexing his neck [courier-journal.com].
Worth a glass of Freedom Wine [bsky.app], à votre santé.
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 5, Insightful) by jelizondo on Saturday February 15, @11:03PM
At the very least, one can get the news without getting a panic attack. Thanks to Jon Steward and John Oliver we can laugh a little at the sad reality…
(Score: 5, Insightful) by looorg on Saturday February 15, @10:19PM (3 children)
California? Those people might be a bit weird even for danish people. Denmark should buy Florida instead. Easier coastal access. It's basically a bog/swamp just like their homeland. No hills. Flat. Like everything danish. Also they both like pork and beer. It's just perhaps to many redneck-republicans. But then the main colour of the danish flag is Red and it has a big white cross on it. See they have things in common, things both parties will like and enjoy.
Florida is also filled with old people. They might like some "free" socialist welfare.
If they can't buy it, then perhaps some kind of a trade? Florida and some other state you don't care for anymore for Greenland? They gotta spend all their Ozempic-gazillions on something. Might as well go on a little shopping spree. Apparently it's all the rage these days ...
If I lived in America and was asked if I wanted to be Danish instead I would say yes. It would be a step up on most international comparisons.
(Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Saturday February 15, @10:34PM
I'd advise against it. At least not until the current owner cleans up the endemic pest infestation there.
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday February 16, @02:12AM
I have lived all over the Florida peninsula for 55 years, and spent a few days bicycling across Denmark one summer.
I assure you, Denmark is nothing like Florida.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Sunday February 16, @08:06PM
If I were going to spend money on real estate, I'd probably pick a location that wasn't going to get wrecked by hurricanes several times a year, and if current trends continue will be at least partially underwater in a couple of decades.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 15, @10:41PM (3 children)
I think a more apropos activity would be for the states of Washington, Oregon and California to immediately hold referendums inquiring whether voters in those states would like to join Canada as new provinces. I'm pretty certain Canada would be interested.
(Score: 0, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 15, @10:49PM (1 child)
but Canada would have to trade British Colombia for it in order to maintain the manifest destiny! (:-\/
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 16, @08:32PM
Not BC, but Quebec...
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Monday February 17, @10:46PM
There would be a significant number of Minnesotans who would not be opposed to the notion of this state to becoming a Canuckian province.
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 15, @10:53PM (8 children)
Kind of off-topic from the actual content of the just (article), but the reasoning that went into the original proposal... it's as though Donald has no sense of "friendship" or "cooperation" or "sharing" at all. Nor any sense of maintaining your own interests by treating others decently.
It's astounding insight into Donald's thoughts. I knew Donald was fucked up, but that a human can be *so* fucked up is astounding to me. It's like he grew up in abject poverty.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 16, @12:58AM
> It's like he grew up in abject poverty.
Where have you been the last 50 years? Trump was brought up as a spoiled brat by a crooked real estate developer/father (Fred Trump cheated his suppliers including one of my great-uncles). Then Donald was schooled by Roy Cohn, the lawyer who worked with red-baiting senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s. That's just the start, it gets worse as he got older.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by c0lo on Sunday February 16, @01:23AM
FTFY
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 4, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Sunday February 16, @02:29AM (3 children)
There's an old conspiracy theory about George Washington being replaced in his later life, various "evidence" presented from changes in appearance to changed in his demeanor.
I think that tracks with his transition into power. At some point he was no longer "the man in charge" he became the face of the consortium which kept him in power, and as such he started representing their views more than his own.
I have strongly felt that every president from Reagan to the present is that same "face man" playing the role of brave leader, but really just reading the scripts they are handed / teleprompter.
DT was a little off script in early 2017, but he got in line quickly. Demented asshole seems to be the brand his scriptwriters feed him, probably in large part because he can ad lib that role most entertainingly.
The depth of unrestrained selfishness is a product of the committee behind the curtain.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 16, @02:27PM (1 child)
> The depth of unrestrained selfishness is a product of the committee behind the curtain.
No, it's more than that, remember (for just one example) that he screwed his sibling(s) out of their inheritance. That was well before there was any committee behind the curtain.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday February 17, @01:34AM
Fair enough, though I doubt he's anything unusual in trust fund baby circles.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Funny) by srobert on Monday February 17, @10:58PM
"There's an old conspiracy theory about George Washington being replaced in his later life ..."
If you read the Constitution backwards there's a section where it just keeps repeating, "I buried George. I buried George, ...".
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Lester on Sunday February 16, @05:56PM
Lebensraum, "necessity of vital space" that was the excuse of Hitler to invade other countries. Trump has out smarted Hitler, "economic security" is enough.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Sunday February 16, @08:25PM
Exactly the opposite: This is because he grew up rich enough and sheltered enough to never have experienced anything resembling economic want.
Both my experience and lots of research says that the poorer people very much understand the concept of sharing, mutual aid, reciprocity, etc. The truly poor typically have as their first safety net asking friends and family for help when the chips are down (illness, injury, house fires, etc), and know their friends are in the same boat, so they're very likely to chip in when their friends are in the same situation. And there's a lot of social pressure to be generous in those situations, since if you're known as a cheapskate who won't help your best mate out when they're in trouble, others are less likely to be generous to you when it's your turn.
That's also why there are also studies that show poor people being more charitable than rich people [npr.org].
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 4, Funny) by Snotnose on Sunday February 16, @01:07AM (1 child)
https://www.wilx.com/2025/02/10/illinois-governor-declares-lake-michigan-is-now-lake-illinois/ [wilx.com]
Of course I'm against DEI. Donald, Eric, and Ivanka.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Sunday February 16, @01:27AM
Is there any dose of satire at any level (source or news outlet)?
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2, Funny) by Moof123 on Sunday February 16, @03:39AM
We are quite the bargain by comparison. Take us first!
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday February 16, @04:32AM (2 children)
Have Washington state, Oregon, and California become a new province of Canada, and New England and New York state another. That accomplishes the "national divorce" several of the talking heads in the von Schitzenpantz admin have been calling for, fairly well breaks along cultural/lack of cultural lines, and gives "real America" their own fenced-off territory.
Just, um, don't tell the "real Americans" about how much power and money and food production and science and stuff all those newly-Canadian territories won't be sending over to them any longer. If they think egg prices are bad now...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 16, @02:32PM
Very clever! Now you won't have to move to Canada, just stay in Buffalo and move the border!!
I'm also in the western NY area and look forward to visiting my friends in Toronto without that annoying border crossing in the way.
(this is straight, not sarcasm).
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Monday February 17, @11:02PM
Minnesota too!
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 1) by jgfenix on Sunday February 16, @08:03PM (2 children)
California' GDP is 9.5 times Denmark's. They almost can afford Hawai, though.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by pTamok on Sunday February 16, @09:57PM
Have you never heard of a 'leveraged buyout' [wikipedia.org]?
Perhaps the blue states should propose to secede from the Union and petition to become territories of the Kingdom of Denmark. The red states might well agree* (consent), as it would, in one stroke, remove most of the irritating liberals from the USA. What is not to like?
*U.S. Supreme Court: Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1868) [justia.com]
(Score: 2) by higuita on Tuesday February 18, @07:33PM
don't worry, people of California and most of the other USA states would build a fund to help the buy out, by the exact opposite reasons