7 Responses

1. 

   1)

   Floridiot said on 8/14/2008 @ 7:01pm PT: [Permalink]

   Boy that Kevin, what a Kidder he is…sheesh

   You can’t make this shit up

2. 

   2)

   Floridiot said on 8/14/2008 @ 8:17pm PT: [Permalink]

   This man knows what I’ve been talking about forever…motive

3. 

   3)

   teri said on 8/15/2008 @ 7:33am PT: [Permalink]

   It seems like every voting problem comes down to the source code issue- Can you report on that and do you think open source is good ? How come you don’t talk about that ? If open source was in place with paper ballots- wouldn’t that be better ? It seems like this subjecr is avoided on Daily News and your blog…

4. 

   4)

   John Gideon said on 8/15/2008 @ 8:02am PT: [Permalink]

   Teri

   There are very few articles on Open Voting. I try to capture them when I see them but I do miss some also. It also depends on the content. Then too, when I get blasted by someone and accused of being in the vendors pocket because I do miss an article, it doesn’t make me want to go back and capture that article.

   I think Open Source is a good idea. In fact we worked with a group on the east coast in hopes of getting open source software into the NY voting systems. Unfortunately that failed.

   Now that I’ve opened myself for attack by our friend he can chime in and I will ignore his false accusations.

5. 

   5)

   Brad Friedman said on 8/15/2008 @ 11:44am PT: [Permalink]

   For what it’s worth “Teri”, I have spoken many times about Open Source being only common sense, if you’re going to use any computer with an election. The more transparency, the better.

   That said, OS is also a false solution in many ways, for a number of reasons. Just some of them:

   + There is no way to know that the OS examined prior to election is actually in use on any machine on election day. So people will have a false sense of security.

   + Even if the OS software is actually the same code used on election day in the machines, it can easily be hacked via other software (operating system, for eg.) and hardware (code can be executed from there as well). Again, offering a false sense of security.

   + A number of the open voting “solutions” I’ve seen presented use touch-screen systems and/or computer printed “ballots”. A computer printed ballot can *ever* work in an election, as it can be easily hacked such that most voters will never notice vote flips.

   That’s just a number of reasons why, though open source makes sense for transparency if you *must* use a computer in an election, it is ultimately no solution to the problem, anymore than touch-screens and “paper trails” were.

   Hand-marked paper ballots, counted publicly and transparently, are the only way to go, barring anybody inventing something I’m currently unaware of.

6. 

   6)

   sam wiseman said on 8/16/2008 @ 1:08pm PT: [Permalink]

   {Ed Note: Comment by Brent Turner of Open Voting Consortium, posting as “Sam Wiseman” again deleted. Mr. Turner has been banned here for refusing to follow the rules and posting under multiple identities, spamming his advocacy for his voting company, Open Voting Consortium, in every post. If you are unable to follow the few simple rules for posting here, Mr. Turner, I can’t see why anybody would think your company, OVC, should be entrusted with counting *anybody’s* vote, open source or otherwise. – BF}

7. 

   7)

   Floridiot said on 8/16/2008 @ 5:12pm PT: [Permalink]

   You can have any kind of source code you want as long as it’s backed up with precinct level hand counting and precinct to state level double checking (see if the numbers still match as reported) IMO