These Two Columns Are United by the Fact That Both Provoked Public Outrage

Did mother wash the window frame?
The second of January, the dawn of a new era of equality... the sunrise of sexual democracy has risen in California... Do you recall the comedy in which Schwarzenegger portrayed a pregnant man? In this case, farce preceded tragedy. Under the new law SB 777¹, signed by the California governor, children in public and private schools are prohibited from being informed that a woman and a man are necessary for the birth of a child.
The law, which applies to the entire educational system from kindergarten through twelfth grade, combats any form of discrimination, including sexual discrimination. In particular, the law protects transsexuals, bisexuals, and homosexuals. Do not think that the aforementioned categories of citizens are persecuted in California schools! Today, any American will cross himself three times before saying something that might upset such sensitive representatives of non-traditional sexual orientation. Now, concern for them has moved to a higher level: the law protects children from references to heterosexual relations as something natural or more widespread. Such references might push minors toward heterosexuality at the expense of trans-, bi-, and homosexual relations! To this end, it is prescribed:
— to abandon the description of marriage as a relationship between persons of different sexes;
— to inform children about the possibility of surgical and hormonal sex change;
— not to indicate that people are born belonging to one of two sexes;
— when studying history, to mention not only men and women, but also homosexuals, bisexuals, and transsexuals;
— not to assert that children result from paired relations between women and men;
— to allow boys to use women's restrooms and girls to use men's;
— to abandon the use of sex-linked words to designate parents and spouses ("mother", "father", "husband", "wife");
— to put an end to the outrageous American tradition of electing a prom king and queen at graduation ceremonies.
The law is not limited to the provisions listed above. There is much else written there — about the financing of school libraries, the arrangement of school buses, and other matters — but the true innovation is precisely the equalization of all forms of sexuality.
Hard to believe? It became easier for me after I saw a photograph of the bill's author, which he/she/it posted on his/her/its website². Judging by the name Sheila, the senator's gender³ is female. The "sexual-democratic" (trans-, bi-, homo-, etc.) organizations of America brand Schwarzenegger for his refusal to legalize same-sex marriage. Contrary to the state's prohibition, the authorities of San Francisco register homosexual marriages by their own decision, while the tyrannical governor attempts to ban this. Law SB 777 became, in this confrontation, a sort of compensation for the "discriminated" categories of citizens.
The compensation proved dubious. By not allowing adults to play the games of their choosing, the state descends upon children, creating chaos in their minds and souls. I will touch upon far from the most important details, as I do not wish to relish the sexual subject matter in connection with its perception by children. What, in your view, would happen to world history and literature if it were dissected so that heterosexual relations held no priority over alternatives? And how would one need to violate the biology curriculum?
Nevertheless, the situation, as it seems to me, is not hopeless. Perhaps the overreaching defenders of "trans", "bi", and "homo" will be restrained by the defenders of believers' rights? At the very least, a Christian social movement has already emerged against the "normalization of pederasty" (direct quote) by law SB 777. Its activists, judging by photographs⁴, possess not only gender but also biological sex⁵. However, the notorious law makes an exception for schools belonging to religious communities — to avoid discrimination.
And an even more compelling basis for hope is provided by the fact that the task set by the law is unachievable. Neither our biological nature, nor the structure of language (whether English or Russian⁶), nor the entire prehistory of culture will permit the construction of a society of genuine equality between the norm and deviations.
(Oh, have I written something superfluous? It is fortunate that we are not in America... But will readers of a different orientation be offended by me? I hope they will understand that in designating their self-identification as a deviation, there is no denial of their right to that deviation. Incidentally, the Russian word "izvrashtentsy" [perverts] is unfortunate, as it bears a negative character, indicating the transformation of the norm into something opposite. In Ukrainian, such people are "zbochentsi" — that is, "those who have gone sideways, aside"; the etymological logic is roughly that of the word "marginals". Not opponents of the majority, but those on the periphery. "Zbochentsi" are free individuals, but if they begin to influence children, they thereby violate the children's normal development. We all have the right to deviation and illness, but we must not harm the health of others. Shall I explain why heterosexuality is normal⁷ for our biological nature? There is little space, and the assertion is trivial in any case...)
When Slavophile nativists predict the downfall of Western democracies, I am inclined to regard their words not as arguments, but as symptoms. But even to me it appeared that if the United States continues to play games akin to law SB 777, this country will have no normal future. Will they recover after falling ill?

¹California Student Civil Rights Act.

² https://www.eqca.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=9oINKWMCF&b=2292609&ct=3622857

³ Gender — the result of sexual self- and social identification, something far more important than biological sex, predetermind by trivialities such as biological essence.

⁴ For example, at usgala.blogspot.com/2007/12/blog-post_09.html

⁵ How interestingly the world is arranged: even from Christian fundamentalists there can be some benefit — it is not all "scientific creationism" that they propagate!

⁶ Both "ono" and "it" lose to "ei", "emu", "she", and "he" in animacy.

⁷ The norm is that which reproduces itself most steadily.

Was There a Hacker?
What is the role of modern information technologies in the governance of the state? Recent events in the Ukrainian parliament gave yet another occasion to reflect on this question.
The significance of one or two votes in current Ukrainian politics is extraordinarily high. In this country it is impossible to predict in advance the outcome of a competition between political opponents (supporters of stability will call this a defect of the Ukrainian political system, while supporters of democracy will call it a virtue). In recent years, a struggle has been under way between two camps of politicians — the "Blues" and the "Oranges". These camps differ in the financial-industrial groups upon which they rely, in the regions where they have greater support, in the type of rhetoric they employ, and, to some degree, in the values they profess. In 2004, a crude attempt to transfer power to a representative of the "Blues" provoked powerful popular outrage, and the leader of the "Oranges" became president of the country (having become considerably more "blue" over time). The parliamentary elections of 2006 gave a majority to the "Oranges", but one of the victorious parties defected to the "Blues" and handed power to them. In the extraordinary elections of 2007, the "Oranges" obtained a very slim majority (228 deputies out of 450). More than two months passed from the elections to the beginning of decisive action by the forces that had won them. The "Blue" authorities, unwilling to hand the reins of government to their opponents, did not waste time and attempted to split the victors, repeating the success of 2006. Allegedly, the size of the bribe from the "Blues" to those "Orange" deputies who would vote against the new government, or at least "fall ill" during the key vote, reached 10–20 million dollars! But is influencing deputies the only means of ensuring the disruption of a problematic vote?
In the Rada (Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine), a voting system also called "Rada" operates. Seventeen years ago, the first version of this system was developed, and the current, third version was installed in 2003. Its developer is the academic Institute for Problems of Mathematical Machines and Systems, heir to the glorious traditions of the Ukrainian school of cybernetics. Judging by descriptions, it is not easy to consider the interface of this system user-friendly for its users (the people's deputies). However, the developer asserts that the "Rada" system is distinguished by exceptional quality, reliability, and ease of use. How much it cost is unknown to the author of these lines, but, in accordance with the traditions of Ukrainian (and indeed post-Soviet in general) political life, it is clear that no expense was spared in its creation. And who is right — the critics or the creators — you may judge for yourself.
When voting, a deputy must insert his personal card into his terminal, and then, within a rather short period, press and hold for some time the button confirming his choice. As it turns out, of the eight seconds allotted for voting, the button must be held for two seconds. If it is held for less than one and a half seconds or more than three, the system may not register the vote. If the button is pressed before the second second of voting, or held after the sixth, the system may also fail to register. Now imagine how pro-government deputies of the previous parliament suffered, managing the voting for multiple cards simultaneously (for themselves, for a colleague, for another colleague, and yet another...). The wealthiest man in Ukraine, a deputy from the "Blues", was almost never present in the Rada, yet his card faithfully voted on all questions! The then-opposition said something about violations of the Constitution, which requires deputies to vote in person, but who pays attention to such trifles! Now, however, when the "Blues" are in the minority, they have recognised their constitutional duty and actively ensure that voting is personal.
...And so the "Orange" coalition puts to a vote the election of a prime minister. 226 votes are needed. There are 227 "bayonets" available (one deputy is watching a football match with the leaders of the "Blues"). They vote. 225 votes! And immediately two deputies declare that they voted "for", but their votes were not counted. The speaker puts the matter to a revote. Again 225 votes, and again a declaration of an uncounted expression of will! Supporters of the would-be prime minister declare that the "Rada" system has been sabotaged by the "Blues". The latter, for their part, explain the situation by the impotence of the coalition formed without their participation. Representatives of the SBU (Security Service of Ukraine) are summoned to parliament and begin an inspection of the system.
Do you think it was possible to establish whether there had been interference? Correctly — no. The system sometimes malfunctions: during test voting, in each sector (except the Communists), one card (a different one each time) failed to register. Nevertheless, no traces of interference were established. The developer of the "Rada" system argues how reliable it is. As ill luck would have it, one of the "Blue" deputies' terminals spontaneously catches fire (begins to smoke) and has to be urgently replaced. The SBU asserts that the "Rada" system has not been certified by that organisation; the developer insists that there is no requirement for it to be... The President resubmits the same candidate for the post of prime minister; the "Oranges" wish to vote by show of hands, while their opponents refuse to change the procedure; the opponents must be compensated with leadership positions in parliamentary committees... Finally, a vote takes place in which the presiding officer reads out the names of the deputies in turn, and they raise (or do not raise) their hands and announce their choice aloud. On that day, only the "Oranges" had registered (the leaders of the "Blues" were insuring themselves against the prime ministerial candidate receiving even a single vote from the opposing camp), and so approximately half the total number of deputies was polled. The prime minister is elected, the government is formed. Alas, such a vote took a genuinely great deal of time. What millennium are we living in?
Was the "Rada" system deliberately disabled? Who knows. What will happen to it now? Time will tell; confidence in it has already been lost. Does the problem of providing the mechanism of power with transparent and reliable voting systems exist? Yes. Does it matter only for Ukrainian politics? Hardly...

D. Shabanov. Did mother wash the window frame? // Computerra, Moscow, 2008. – No. 3 (719).
D. Shabanov. Was there a hacker? // Computerra, Moscow, 2008. – No. 1–2 (717–718). — P. 15