"The voting records don’t say who a person voted for, just whether or not they voted. It includes presidential primary and general election records, as well as state, local and school board elections dating back decades.
The database, which is a collection of public records, can be purchased from the Iowa Secretary of State, typically for $1,500 to $1,800. Buyers must promise to only use the information for political purposes."
It's standard practice for states to salt their voter lists with fake names. If, e.g., a non-political solicitation shows up to the fake name, the sender is caught. Same thing with FEC data -- politicians have to list their donors publicly, but it isn't legal for other politicians to solicit those people, and the FEC enforces it with salting.
A number of sites' paywalls can be bypassed by modifying your referrer, with an extension like Referer Control [0] for example. If we take WSJ, I entered their root URL as a site filter, and set a custom referrer (in this case 'https://www.google.com'). This works for many news sites [1], but LinkedIn for example seems to ignore this.
- I get a partial WSJ page obscured with "To Read the Full Story, Subscribe or Sign In"
I think WSJ is getting smart. Maybe they temp-block IP addresses that try to access a news article (with or without a Google referer) if this IP just tried to access it without a referer in the last X minutes.
Edit: I didn't change anything and now it works. (Standard Chrome install on Linux, latest version, no third-party plugins installed, only extensions installed are Authy and Google Docs.) Go figure what WSJ is doing...
Well a pirate is(usually) a private person or ship authorized by a government by letters of marque to attack foreign vessels during wartime, and here we are just reading content we had no intention of paying for which is bundled in to a larger service we have no intention of paying for.
You are not incorrect if you are indicating it is likely unethical however.
That is "usually" never the definition of a pirate, you are describing privateers. Piracy is not limited to times of war nor is it dependent on a sovereign nation.
Wow, this clears up a lot. Logistically, it wouldn't have made sense that the parent was implying most of the thread had gone to Buckingham Palace to receive wartime repreive in order to simply read this article. I was super confused.
Thanks for putting this into context for me and in context this makes more sense.
I guess I just had the wrong definition of pirate.
Well privateers and pirates are pretty much the same thing in practice, the only difference being that pirates operate on their own, while privateers are blessed by a particular State. But they both follow the same course of action.
The database, which is a collection of public records, can be purchased from the Iowa Secretary of State, typically for $1,500 to $1,800. Buyers must promise to only use the information for political purposes."
In case anyone was wondering what's in the data.