[quote]jodgey wrote:
RSU –
Did you also notice the lack of faith that the people in line had with the system. The crowd of twenty people around me we’re talking, and the consensus was that the system has control, there is no accountability, and with a shrug of the shoulders, we are doing all that we can.
[/quote]
True. If by some crazy chance we need to do a recount…I guess we’ll just “wing it”
Unfortunately, it will be very easy to shake voter confidence with the new technology that is in place.
All that needs to happen is that we have a very close election and that machines in areas either democrat or republican have to be discounted. In fact, I’m sure there is great pressure on the company that provides them to ensure that absolutely nothing goes wrong.
For the uninitiated, that translates to hiding problems so that they can sell more of the damned things. After all, profit is everything right?
Technology is nice, but it shouldn’t be used in such a way that people are not able to be sure and confident in the results. Without some type of paper trail, where is the proof?
Once results are stored in a database, they are just data values, they can be manipulated, deleted, added to, queried incorrectly or whatever. I don’t trust putting that much power into the hands of the manufacturer or the people that deal with the results.
I’m sure there are processes in place to help protect against this, but I don’t care. The electoral process should be visible at all times, not performed by hidden tasks. There is a legal principle that fits here… not only must justice be done, but it must be seen to be done.
I’ve developed computer software for a living for the last… well, a longer time now than I prefer to admit… and I know first hand how easy it is to screw things up, overlook something or simply leave in improper access levels to ease support issues.