Skip to main content

View Diary: One Day Until Victory (Let's Close the Deal Together) (168 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  True ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ... but the potential for fraud is significantly less than the potential for fraud with e-voting.  About the only thing you could do is insert rolls of paper with pre-recorded votes (which should be relatively easy to verify), or cross wires somehow so that the wrong holes get punched in the paper (which should be incredibly easy to spot).  Or, I suppose, leave the paper out entirely.

    A voter-verifiable audit trail is only necessary because with computers, there's no necessary connection between the user's input and the printer's output.  For analog systems, there's no way of programming the system to alter a person's vote, hence, no need for a trail.

    Systems which are easier to understand and administer tend to be better than those that are complex, especially when you're working with a group of older volunteers.  And e-voting is anything but easy to understand.

    The more I think about it, the more I realize that computers are completely unsuited for elections.  How long do you think the Diebold machines will last?  Five years?  Ten?  I'm not putting any bets on that touch-screen monitor, personally, and once it's gone, the district has to buy another (expensive) machine.  It's ridiculous, and pointless.

    •  lemming22, another example about computers (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I just saw a presentation which omitted the speaker's #1 item on a list (I only found out by asking afterwards why something wasn't listed).

      It seems he e-mailed his presentation and the software dropped whatever wasn't in a certain font.

      I collect computer glitch disaster stories.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site