Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Trends Electionland

electionlandtrends.appspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 178 posts

Re: Google Trends Electionland

#121

Post by Pigo »

nostromo wrote: post #67
NelsonMinar wrote: post #37

It's pretty but what is this really telling us? There's a 126% increase in searchers for "Voter intimidation" in Hoback, Wyoming. OK, so does that mean that someone's being intimidated? Planning to intimidate? Curious about the news? Does a "126% increase" mean there were 7 searches today instead of just 4?

It's meaningless. Near Seattle there are trends reported for "voter intimidation" and "long wait times" and "voting machine problems." Those trends make no sense for a region that votes by mail.

I'm going to search for intimidation and see if it pops up on the map, sorry everyone

Re: Google Trends Electionland

#122

Post by freehunter »

deckar01 wrote: post #107
nthitz wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

React + d3 + Canvas + More. Disclaimer: I helped build it.

You might consider including the BSD licenses those projects were published under in your minified JavaScript file. Is this project's source code published anywhere?

As someone who is not a developer and doesn't know that much about open source licenses, is this something you have to do? If I built something using React, I have to publish their license with my code? If I build something with Javascript, do I have to publish their license as well?

Do I have to tell everyone what technologies I've used to built my software, or...? That seems weird to me, but again I'm not a developer so I've never dealt with that. I've never released a license with my Bash scripts.

Re: Google Trends Electionland

#123

Post by perfectfire »

Pigo wrote: post #121
nostromo wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's meaningless. Near Seattle there are trends reported for "voter intimidation" and "long wait times" and "voting machine problems." Those trends make no sense for a region that votes by mail.

I'm going to search for intimidation and see if it pops up on the map, sorry everyone

I'm assuming you don't want to tell us where you live, so please update us on whether it showed up on the map or not.

Re: Google Trends Electionland

#124

Post by amorphid »

eli wrote: post #118
dmix wrote: post #69

Apparently a bunch of states (23?) are using a software system called Interstate Crosscheck to look for "double voters". > Election officials in more than two dozen states have compiled lists of citizens whom they allege could be registered in more than one state – thus potentially able to cast multiple ballots – and eligible to be purged from the voter rolls. The problem is that it often only uses a persons name as…

No, it is not possible for your vote to be "wiped out." If you cast a ballot it will be counted. It's frankly a bit dangerous to imply otherwise. As it says in the bit of article you quoted, states can use these systems to find people who are " eligible to be purged from the rolls." This is bad. Especially when it disproportionately affects certain populations of people. But if you show up on election day and you've…

I could see a system that would prevent you from getting a ballot in multiple locations. Since the vote is supposedly anonymous, I'm not sure how they'd purge a cast ballot.

Re: Google Trends Electionland

#125

Post by JumpCrisscross »

eli wrote: post #118
dmix wrote: post #69

Apparently a bunch of states (23?) are using a software system called Interstate Crosscheck to look for "double voters". > Election officials in more than two dozen states have compiled lists of citizens whom they allege could be registered in more than one state – thus potentially able to cast multiple ballots – and eligible to be purged from the voter rolls. The problem is that it often only uses a persons name as…

No, it is not possible for your vote to be "wiped out." If you cast a ballot it will be counted. It's frankly a bit dangerous to imply otherwise. As it says in the bit of article you quoted, states can use these systems to find people who are " eligible to be purged from the rolls." This is bad. Especially when it disproportionately affects certain populations of people. But if you show up on election day and you've…

At least in New York, if you aren't on the voter list you cast an affidavit ballot. This is reviewed for accuracy. If it passes, the envelope is opened and the vote counted. If it fails, the vote is discarded (a letter is also supposed to be sent).

If you are on the voter rolls and vote, your vote is counted. If you aren't, it's tougher to be as certain.

Re: Google Trends Electionland

#126

Post by dominotw »

cwilkes wrote: post #82
girzel wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that Washington State is all mail-in, I doubt we're seeing a lot of actual voter intimidation! I'm also in Seattle, and dropped my ballot off at one of three drop-off points. There were some nice people in smocks there who thanked me for voting.

This. I don't understand the whole going to a location to vote on two dozen things that I probably don't know well enough versus reading a pamphlet and taking an hour or so to fill it out at my leisure. Seriously why do we have voting places anymore? Just do it all by mail.

To weed out people with jobs and responsibilities.

Re: Google Trends Electionland

#127

Post by dmix »

eli wrote: post #118
dmix wrote: post #69

Apparently a bunch of states (23?) are using a software system called Interstate Crosscheck to look for "double voters". > Election officials in more than two dozen states have compiled lists of citizens whom they allege could be registered in more than one state – thus potentially able to cast multiple ballots – and eligible to be purged from the voter rolls. The problem is that it often only uses a persons name as…

No, it is not possible for your vote to be "wiped out." If you cast a ballot it will be counted. It's frankly a bit dangerous to imply otherwise. As it says in the bit of article you quoted, states can use these systems to find people who are " eligible to be purged from the rolls." This is bad. Especially when it disproportionately affects certain populations of people. But if you show up on election day and you've…

You're right, I misread that. It would prevent people from being on the 'electoral rolls' which could prevent them from voting. Not removing people's votes retroactively.

Re: Google Trends Electionland

#128

Post by perfectfire »

pc86 wrote: post #120
deckiedan wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could also be people who had a /wonderful/ easy voting experience, and heard from some guy who reads HN that 'voter intimidation' was a trending search term, so decided to search and see what the fuss was about...

This greatly overestimates the importance of HN as a source of news.

I'm pretty sure he meant HN as a just an example. You could easily replace HN with reddit or HuffPo or CNN or [name of some political blog].

Re: Google Trends Electionland

#129

Post by draugadrotten »

TheCoreh wrote: post #15
kens wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are xkcd mentions on HN always prefixed with Obligatory?

"Obligatory xkcd reference", based on the idea that there are so many xkcd comics, at least one of them will be relevant to any given thread.

https://relevantxkcd.appspot.com/

Re: Google Trends Electionland

#130

Post by jdormit »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #119
BinaryIdiot wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. I'm registered in 3 states (I always kinda assumed registering in a new state unregistered you in another) and my wife is registered in 2. I wonder if my name is on that list. Damn even the criteria they use doesn't technically have to be unique; it's possible to have the same name, DOB and last 4 digits of a SSN (though that's likely incredibly rare but still the possibility is theoretically there). I f…

Merely last name and DOB brings up a fairly unique value. This is what Walgreens, and others, now use instead of SSN. There was an earlier HN item about how DOB, gender, and Zip identifies 87% of the US population uniquely. No SSN needed in either case. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2942967

I would argue that 87% is an unacceptable margin of error given that we are talking about the presidential election.
Post reply on HN