(no subject)

[theweaselking]

Finnish computer security expert finds Diebold's hardcoded back door to defraud election results.

Comments

[matgb]

Wonderful.

There's a simple way of avoiding hard coded machine voting fraud of course.

Paper ballot papers, manual counts.

Elections last week in the UK, one allegation of a problem in which it appears 3000 votes were counted twice. Found because the number of votes counted didn't tally with the number of votes cast when they performed the obligatory manual re-check.

No stupid hanging chads or Diebold machines, mark the box, it gets counted.

[giza.livejournal.com]

Not to mention that paper does not crash.

I can't understand why people in the US have such a hard-on for electronic voting machines. It's not like they do the job significantly faster than paper did. It's not like there's a crushing voter turnout that requires the use of machines. I just don't get it.

[zenten.livejournal.com]

Maybe it's because electronic voting is easier to defraud, but it looks cooler and more secure to the average person?

[corruptedjasper.livejournal.com]

I dunno 'bout the US, but here in NL electronic voting has changed the timeline from a few days to a few hours after the polls close, waiting only on the capital which is still paper. Significantly faster, yes. Of course, one could argue that it doesn't really matter much, but mostly it's just a heck of a lot cheaper in the long run. The machines cost 10 or 20k each to purchase, but they're logistically very easy, since they also eliminate voting booths (they're just really big suitcases that you set down on a table and then fold out into a complete voting booth). They also make lines at the voting stations a thing of the past, since voting itself is actually much faster.

[culfinriel.livejournal.com]

Snoopy for president. It can be done.