The Danger of Touch Screen Voting

[Q Classic]

using technology is outside of the abilities that most stupid people have.

if you can't figure out a friggin' butterfly ballot... oy.

and why did the contract for those machines, those diebolds, have to go to such a technologically inferior system? that's just asstastic.

then again, administrators never listen to techies, and so end up wasting money on things that don't work or never will do their jobs well, simply because the marketing's better.

[Japher]

asstastic I like that 'word'

If some one can't figure out how to use the most simplistic of balots it should be well within the law to hit 'em over the head with a tack hammer.

[Sandman]

The ballot system should be standardised across the whole country. All these regional variations make no sense, and seem to be just asking for trouble.

[Q Classic]

*bump*

and:

http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,61014-2,00.html?tw=wn_story_page_next1

looks like this one's insecure, too.

[ghen]

I'm just glad that most hackers would vote exactly how I would vote.. If there's going to be a scandal, why not have it benifit me? Mmm thats right. Make me Prime Minister, it seems to be a title thrown around alot recently..

[Q Classic]

hackers don't tend to be conservatives, which is what the scandal seems to be about, at least politically.

i don't give a damn about the politics. i'm involved because the technology is weak. if the system we use to vote is broken in that manner, who cares who gets elected? the system must function flawlessly, it must be secure, it must be the best system conceivable.

[Az]

What's so difficult about voting?
We use ballot papers, in which each voter chooses the appropriate piece of paper for parties, and candidates.
I've worked in counting votes. Everythings goes great, with parties from the entire political spectrum participating.

[Q Classic]

theoretically, there's nothing difficult about voting. but here in the states, we have people who mess up butterfly ballots. thus, several states are now moving to electronic voting.

now, the problem is, one of these companies has been alleged to be dishonest in its vote tallies, and its bosses have said things which can be construed in a negative light.

i don't care about that. the problem with the diebold machines is that they do not have a paper trail, so to speak; the voter cannot be certain who it is they really did vote for, if they couldn't tell already; furthermore, the code that runs these machines is not secure. the database is accessible by microsoft access, and there is no encryption duing commonucation.

rather than actually try and improve the product, they're assuming that because there are certain physical barriers that could probably stop most breaches, while using the DMCA to try and quash anything that says otherwise.

the other company, sequoia, has thus far kept mum, and hopefully will not take the route that diebold has.

[Vesayen]

I think I can make some money out of this..... I'm going to try to do a long-term short sell on diebold-as when this scandal REALLY comes out, their stock price will plumit.



The current price is:

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=DBD

Gonna put in 100 dollars, even if it dosent tank, no big loss.

Right now it is at 56.13 with a 52 week high of 56.83 and a 56 week low of 33.50-it has TONS to fall.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Azazel
We use ballot papers, in which each voter chooses the appropriate piece of paper for parties, and candidates.

This is a very easy system to corrupt, which is why we abandoned it 100 years ago. Poll watchers could simply see who picked up what piece of paper and take action accordingly.

[Henrik]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
This is a very easy system to corrupt, which is why we abandoned it 100 years ago. Poll watchers could simply see who picked up what piece of paper and take action accordingly.

What's stopping you from picking up all the pieces of paper and then only put one in the envelope he's assigned and then put it in the ballot.

No way to monitor that (well apart from breaking the ballot box open).

It's how we do it over here

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Henrik
What's stopping you from picking up all the pieces of paper and then only put one in the envelope he's assigned and then put it in the ballot.

The Democratic Party boss watching you pick up a slip of paper that wasn't Democratic. That ment you had intentions of maybe not voting for the Democrats, which meant that you could lose your job, garbage would stop being picked up, your store might get vanadalized, you might get beaten, and (in the South) you might get a visit from some night riders in white sheets.

Our government in the 19th Century was thoroughly corrupt.

[Spiffor]

What? Nobody posted it yet?

[Az]

This is a very easy system to corrupt, which is why we abandoned it 100 years ago. Poll watchers could simply see who picked up what piece of paper and take action accordingly.

don't you people have booths, so this is invisible?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Azazel
don't you people have booths, so this is invisible?

You don't hide when you take the leaflets. You only hide when you put the right leaflet in the envelope.