My ass backwards state finally did something right
http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,26...w=wn_tophead_1
California will require paper receipts for all evoting machines to be collected at the polls to provide a paper trail for auditing purposes. Too bad it's not mandatory until 2006. Ack.
California will require paper receipts for all evoting machines to be collected at the polls to provide a paper trail for auditing purposes. Too bad it's not mandatory until 2006. Ack.
Comments
Originally posted by Scott
Paper's always been a secure method of record keeping.
I just listened to some reports from the Georgian election. One told about a situation where someone at the end of the election day came in with a handful of prefilled ballot paper and stuffed them in the box. Another told that while they were counting the ballots in a district where the opposition looked like winning suddenly the light went out for ten seconds and when it was turned on there was double the amount on the table that had been there seconds before. So in essence your right in your sarcastic comment Scott.
But what if someone wanted and had the means to alter an strictly non paper election? Then it would go unnoticed. A "delete file" command doesn´t involve the storming into election places and burning ballot papers and a "add 500 votes to party X list" doesn´t involve smuggling in prefilled ballots, turning off lights and the sudden appearance of more votes.
And even if you found the 100% secure non paper voting method it would still be bad if people felt insecurity with the method.
Originally posted by BR
http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,26...w=wn_tophead_1
.......California will require paper receipts for all evoting machines to be collected at the polls to provide a paper trail for auditing purposes.......
See...they must have read your previous post on the topic...
Keep up the pressure BR and who knows, you might sway Congress to fall into to line .
And Florida still hasn't fixed its problems.
By the way... the justice department still hasn't looked into the illegal purging of voter rolls in Fla.
Originally posted by Scott
Paper's always been a secure method of record keeping.
Total Election Security With Magic Gnomes Guarding Results Burned Into Platinum Discs > Paper Trail > No Paper Trail.
Simple mathematical terms that a simple mathematical man can understand.
Indy Car style total breaking apart of the car to absorb the force of impact with full restraints and wraparound airbags > Side Curtain Airbags and Steering wheel Airbags > Steering wheel Airbags > No Airbags
Are steering wheel airbags absolute security in an accident? No.
Are they better than no airbags? Yes.
Come on Scott.
A plain-English record, with some form of encrypted checksum printed on it, is not 100% resolution to the problem. It is, however, a layer of redundancy that would not hurt.
Originally posted by audiopollution
Anyone who has followed the Diebold debacle, would surely want a paper record of their vote.
A plain-English record, with some form of encrypted checksum printed on it, is not 100% resolution to the problem. It is, however, a layer of redundancy that would not hurt.
We don't get that now. When I punch my butterfly ballot and drop it in the box there's no other record of it.
This leads toward the whole notion of second chance voting and contingency ballots. Which is for the more part a bad idea. There never has been and never will be a perfect election. And perfection is never the standard.
Of course, that's kind of wordy.
Fellows
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Well the only good thing about the old system with no paper trail is that when people vote for the "sad excuse for good leadership" one could at least hold out hope that the election was fixed. Now with a paper trail when the "sad excuse for good leadership" gets elected you know your fellow CA'ians voted fot the sad excuse. I am not sure which is more depressing.
Fellows
Now now, Fellows, you know how it rankles you when we rag on Texas (not that i disagree ).
Originally posted by addabox
Now now, Fellows, you know how it rankles you when we rag on Texas (not that i disagree ).
CA is not the only state that can have this
These days it is pretty depressing no matter who wins any election period
Would you almost not agree?
Fellows
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
CA is not the only state that can have this
These days it is pretty depressing no matter who wins any election period
Would you almost not agree?
Fellows
In this, my friend, we are in complete accordance.