Aswad
Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Kana I mean, even if it turns out not to be true, what a salacious rumor Bit more than just a rumor. If you've read the source code for the voting machines, you know it's a mess. Easy to slip something in there. And, more to the point, a statistical analysis of the GWB elections indicated a small but significant and systematic discrepancy that could be accounted for by one of the "bugs" in the source code. It may have been a simple mistake, as the code isn't exactly high quality, but it's also not the least bit difficult to plant it. Really, with voting machines, public disclosure of the whole design is necessary. And even that doesn't change the fact that for an average voter to be able to audit the election to the same extent as a paper ballot would require the average voter to know the programming language used, which unfortunately isn't going to happen. This kind of thing just moves the voting process into the realm of magic, something the voters have no idea about the workings of, no control or influence over, and so forth. Using formal verification, public disclosure, standard tools, independent audits and legal codes to regulate implementation of voting machines is a prerequisite to retaining anything resembling free, open and anonymous elections in practice. Just a little bit of incompetence or malice could sway an electronic electon, as-is. Either of those seem possibly applicable to some figures in politics? IWYW, — Aswad.
< Message edited by Aswad -- 11/25/2012 8:38:39 PM >
_____________________________
"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind. From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way. We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.
|