New tests fuel doubts about vote machines (US)

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Patroklos


Just like non-computerized voting machines. I bet access to them in the various stages of ballot movement is far greater.

I am not sure what you want this article to prove?

as mentioned

''These were sold as safe systems. They passed tests as safe systems,'' Sancho said. ``But even in the so-called safe system, if you don't follow the paper ballots, there is a way to rig the election. Except it's not a bunch of guys stuffing ballots in a precinct. It's possibly one person acting in secret changing thousands of votes in a second.''

It looks like something people should be upset about.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave




Well Canadians use it too, sure one would think they want them to be "safe" as well.

Just curious -- Has any Canadian ever used a voting machine of ANY kind?

I'm not saying Canada does not use them but all I know is that I have voted federally, provincially and municipally in two provinces and I have NEVER seen one. It has always been a paper ballot where you mark your X with a pencil

[KrazyHorse]

a) These are optical readers, so they could read paper ballots

b) Despite that, as far as I know, provincial and federal ballots are counted by hand in Canada. My guess is that some municipality somewhere uses these machines

[Kontiki]

I've always used a paper ballot as well. Similar stats to you - two provinces (though two different from you, so that makes four now), multiple municipal, provincial and federal elections.

[Arrian]

Considering that the owner of the company promised to deliver Ohio to the Republicans, the people likely to want to make changes already have access to the central machine. Since there is no way to verify the result afterwards I'd think you should be worried.

That is somewhat worrisome, I'll grant, and I do kinda like the fact that there is a group out there on a crusade about it.

My solution would be to make each polling location have oversight access to the machine by three local poll workers - preferably a Republican, a Democrat and an Independent.

Ultimately, ANY automated system - be it mechanized or electronic - is going to be vulnerable to abuse... human oversight is needed.

-Arrian

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Arrian


That is somewhat worrisome, I'll grant, and I do kinda like the fact that there is a group out there on a crusade about it.

My solution would be to make each polling location have oversight access to the machine by three local poll workers - preferably a Republican, a Democrat and an Independent.

Ultimately, ANY automated system - be it mechanized or electronic - is going to be vulnerable to abuse... human oversight is needed.

-Arrian

sure that is the whole point :-). It is only that now the cheating has become a whole lot easier.

IMO they should be able to make the machines that will be much much harder to rig, and ideally require several different people together in order for cheating to work, thus making it much harder and less likely which would in all likelyhood remove any impact potential rigging could have.

[Winston]

So this could mean that the Kerry camp hacked the system and skewed the results in their favour. The slight catch being they were as incompetent a bunch of losers at rigging the vote as they were at the campaign in general.

Nowhere near the expert job of the Kennedy camp back in 1960.

[Edan]

Originally posted by Arrian


That is somewhat worrisome, I'll grant, and I do kinda like the fact that there is a group out there on a crusade about it.

My solution would be to make each polling location have oversight access to the machine by three local poll workers - preferably a Republican, a Democrat and an Independent.

Ultimately, ANY automated system - be it mechanized or electronic - is going to be vulnerable to abuse... human oversight is needed.

-Arrian

And a paper trail (eg, logging, a physical copy, etc)

There should probably also be plenty of checks - eg, something to prevent more than, say, one vote per minute being allowed.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Winston
So this could mean that the Kerry camp hacked the system and skewed the results in their favour. The slight catch being they were as incompetent a bunch of losers at rigging the voting as they were at the campaign in general.

well for what is worth this is not investigation of former elections but just proving the ability for rigging to be done in an easy manner. Whatever the results, I am sure normal people would rather want that to be either impossible or much harder to do.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
a) These are optical readers, so they could read paper ballots

That would be less of a concern since as long as the paper ballot exists and is kept secure, it is always possible to recount the ballots.

It sounded as if in some U.S. elections, the ONLY record of a vote may be in the memory of some machine and subject to undectable alteration. That just does not sound smart to me.

[Arrian]

to a paper trail. That's key.

-Arrian

[KrazyHorse]

I feel as though all ballots should be counted by hand, with inspectors from all major participants taking part.

That is, as far as I know, how things work here.

[Arrian]

But that doesn't involve widgets that somebody can patent and sell. That just won't do.

-Arrian

[Flubber]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
I feel as though all ballots should be counted by hand, with inspectors from all major participants taking part.

That is, as far as I know, how things work here.

Yup

and as far as I recall, EVERY candicate is welcome to have a certain number of scrutineers at EVERY polling station who can observe the ballot boxes, up to and including when they are counted.

Its low tech but generally most polling stations report inside an hour.

I think the reason for the difference as opposed to our U.S friends is that we typically vote on one thing while most U.S ballots are about the same length as the SATs

[KrazyHorse]

Indeed.

I saw a copy of the sample ballot which my roommate got mailed preceding the Nov 2004 election.