Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Freedom to Tinker » Blog Archive » Evidence of New Jersey Election Discrepancies
Freedom to Tinker » Blog Archive » Sequoia’s Explanation, and Why It’s Not the Whole Story
Freedom to Tinker » Blog Archive » NJ Election Discrepancies Worse Than Previously Thought, Contradict Sequoia’s Explanation

This guy is posting scans of paper readouts of Sequoia despite threats from Sequoia's lawyers. Definitive proof that the Diebold machines are manipulating vote totals.

I was going to ask WHY these bastards are continued to be allowed to peddle their crap in something as important as voting, but I remembered that democracy has nothing to do with it. Despite ongoing evidence to faulty voting machines, they're still allowed to use them. The only reason is that important people are being bribed somewhere. Plain and simple.

Diebold Election Systems is now called Premier Election Solutions. Sequoia is an entirely different company.

Sequoia Voting Systems - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Premier Election Solutions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ah, thanks for that. I get them mixed up. It's all the same, anyway.

Replacing the machines before the Nov. election would cost $600 million. Although we are happy to spend $200 million on an election in Iraq, this is too expensive for an election at home because of terrorists. 9/11. Osama. Orange alert. WMD.

I'm sure the elections in Iraq were more democratic than what we're gonna get

-t

In the 20th century, capitalism triumphed over communism. In the 21st, it will triumph over democracy.

Hurrah!

We still use people-powered counting methods here in Canada. Works great.

True, but there's 10 times more people in the U.S. It's a slightly more complicated job tabulating that many votes.

Surely it's not more complicated, just larger scale?

In a perfect world, maybe. But I'm sure you concur that when we are speaking in terms of human effort, an increase in the shear quantity of vote tabulation will invariably complicate things.

Well, I agree that the task becomes larger, and coordination gets more difficult, but I think the word 'complexity' implies something other than a bigger task. The census is a more complex task, scaling a voting system is not more complex, but it is more difficult.

We're arguing semantics. In my mind it's a more complex process. If it makes you feel better, we'll call it more difficult.

Well for sure we're arguing semantics. I didn't mean to make a big deal of it, it's just that for me the term complex means something a little different from difficult. Sorry to nit pick.

On a related note, while the Greatest Democracy In The World can't build a functioning machine that counts how many times a button is pushed, Estonia is revolutionizing democracy through Internet voting and electronic identification cards: Electronic voting in Estonia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quite exciting!

Electronic ID cards? with Voting?

Electronic ID is its own failure. Combining it with voting?
NO.

That's not revolutionary, that's failure.

Your vote has to be anonymous.

Voting System Checklists by Rebecca Mercuri
What means is used to separate voter identity from voted ballot?

Emmm... Do you know anything about digital signatures or do you just like to spread FUD?

Apologies - I read your response totally backwards initially - and provided rather bad answer to your question .

I can't address the list you provided from A-Z since I'm not estonian (although I might send it to some of my estonian colleagues for review). But regarding the issue of anonymosity: I too have my doubts in this regard, since the means of separating the vote from the voter is dependent on the implementation of the system. But in the end, I believe a well implemented, independently reviewed electronic voting system is more secure than using a paper and a pen.

In my opinion, the positive aspects of the systems are extremely important, and the good outweighs the bad.

Think about it hard. Look how long it takes democracies to do and get things done. China just does it.

With hunger and more scarce resources capitalism and democracy will be in big trouble.

So you may be right.

Maybe a hybrid of the two combined.

Great, because dictatorships have such an outstanding record in preventing hunger...