Posted on 09/12/2017 7:53:50 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
It is good to see a big name like Ron Rivest get involved in this. Maybe more people will listen.
And no restoration of the right to vote upon completion of sentence.
If the federal government centralized or standardized the voting procedures, that would open the door to some bad Voodoo. Man, it would be a disaster. I hope nobody gets ideas about it.
Only enforcing law and punishments on the individual level would work without causing worse corruption.
Do you trust your County and City clerks? How about your election inspectors? In Wisconsin, both the County and City clerks have custody of the machines for weeks in advance and ample time to jigger the machines (or anyone in their families). The Chief Inspectors have custody of the machines over night the night before the election.
dontcha miss the days of arguing over not-filled-in-enough-dots, and hanging chads? life was so simple....
The ‘security’ is usually the root of the problem.
Easy to solve,go back to the old voting machines
Easy to solve,go back to the old voting machines
My son is a computer whiz who says it was common knowledge among geeks that the machines were eminently hackable, either locally or centrally i.e. most of the machines in the country could be altered from a single location by a technique called proportional voting or proportional scoring. He says frustration of the hack was worked but many computer whizzes like himself only better at it who worked hard to block it. He says he started to get into it but better geeks than him were on it and he stayed out of it.
I don’t think so. She won in the big cities that are run and largely populated by people who craved her election. There was hacking attempt and there was counter hack going on.
...”Paper counts may take time but it seems the only secure way and even then with massive security.”...
Who didn’t know that those computers could be tampered with already? It is just common sense considering how the other side constantly campaigns for ways to cheat in elections through having no ID’s for voting, putting through a cheating mechanism like the “Motor Voter Act (legacy of Wendell Ford, Dem. from KY),” open borders, letting illegals vote, etc., etc. Considering that Equifax and the Federal Government have been hacked, it stand to reason that voting machines should be done away with in favor of paper ballots. My state lets me choose which to use and I always choose paper.
Correct, you don’t want to be linked back to how you voted.
But several election cycles ago we had discrepancies in local voting, nobody knew how to toss out the extra votes, because the ballots are all ‘secret.’
So the problem really is a catch 22. Fraud is happening, but once the ballot is cast...the deed is done and nothing can be done to correct the illegal vote.
He should know better, agreed.
No system can claim to be 100% secure. You just can’t. That’s all he should be saying, which is nothing new. Unless he can demonstrate a vulnerability that we’re all unaware of that is easy to exploit, he’s just sensationalizing the issue.
(BAN ELECTRONIC VOTING!)
I would rather wait a few days to get semi-honest results than the cluster we currently have in place.
So if you get a subpoena for your voting receipt, because for instance some campaign decides to contest the election, are you going to refuse to comply with it?
Applying their same logic, a corrupted Scantegrity system would report that the tabulation matched even when it didn't, or would not add the correctly tabulated results in to the final totals. Once a malevolent actor has access to the system it can be corrupted. Whatever interactions you have with such a system subsequently are controlled by the attacker until the system is quarantined, if it can be.
And really that is all that being able to recall your ballot data shows. It doesn't provide any evidence that the ballot was correctly tabulated into the final totals, or even that your selections were carried in to the next phase of vote tabulation.
If the system that the election officials operate in isn't sufficient to detect fraudulent activity, or if the voters don't trust their elected officials then it doesn't matter what kind of voting machines are in use. In countries where the election officials aren't trustworthy they just collect the ballots, throw them out, and declare a winner.
Corrupt government officials don't need to hack the machines, they can just declare fake results absent a process which prevents that. Most states have procedural and legal processes which deter that kind of behavior. In New Hampshire, for example, the election process is run by a large number of elected and appointed officials, including participants from both parties, and the entire process is done in public. So perpetrating the kind of fraud you are suggesting requires a conspiracy including many people, including representatives from both parties.
Not true. There are many different kinds of voting machines in use, most of which have no internet connection or any means of access other than physical contact. The run widely different code bases, and for a lot of machines the code they are running is in ancient EPROM memory that can only be updated by being erased with UV light and then reprogrammed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.