Slashdot Mirror


Voting Machines Vs. Slot Machines

dmh20002 writes "Being a Nevada resident and knowing people who write code for slot machines, I was aware of the stringent measures the state of Nevada uses to vet the security of slot machines. The Nevada Gaming Control Board audits everything about them, both physical and soft, for unintentional and intentional security holes. Hearing the hoopla on voting machines, the contrast was obvious. Slot machines are about money, which is more important than votes, apparently. Now the state of Nevada is looking at electronic voting machines and plan to apply some of the same safeguards. Just applying the Nevada technical standards for gaming machines and vendors to voting machines would be a start, since there don't seem to be any standards for voting machines. A funny/sad sideline is that in Nevada, every year or two a programmer or engineer goes to jail for exploiting slot machines."

5 of 299 comments (clear)

  1. First by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Fuckers!zxfgzxcbzxfbzdfbzdfbszdfbxcvb

  2. Re:The question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic


    I suggest all slashdotters read Steve 'Rim' Jobs' journal.
    You will see him boasting of karma whoring and making slashdot an unpleasant place (some may argue that it already is but that's besides the point)

  3. I'm Paranoid by Pyro226 · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    If the voting machines were properly regulated then the US (or state) government wouldn't be able to dictate the outcome of votes, as we have all seen that they can; George Bush did win the popular vote, it was 5 to 4.

    The federal government is clearly willing to break the law to influence votes in Nevada.

    WASHINGTON, (Reuters Health) - A group supporting marijuana legalization filed a federal complaint Wednesday against the White House's drug policy director, alleging that he violated the law by campaigning against a Nevada marijuana ballot initiative in November.

    The compliant, lodged with the US Office of Special Counsel (OSC), accuses Office of National Drug Control Policy Director John Walters with breaking a law preventing federal officials from using their office to campaign for or against state ballot initiatives.

    It accuses Walters of visiting several Nevada cities on October 10 and 11, 2001, and advocating for the defeat of a marijuana legalization initiative there during press briefings and television appearances.

    Walters' office dismissed the complaint, calling it a political stunt and maintaining that the director, President Bush's chief advisor on drug policy, acted within the law.

    A federal law known as the Hatch Act prohibits federal officials from using their offices to influence elections.

    The ballot measure, which failed 61% to 39%, would have decriminalized possession of less than 3 ounces of marijuana by adults.

    The OSC is a independent agency set up to investigate whistle-blower complaints and alleged wrongdoing by administration officials.

    Officials found guilty of Hatch Act violations can be permanently removed from office or suspended for not less than 30 days, according to the OSC Web site.

    "We want him out of the picture. We want him excommunicated from the federal government forever," said Robert D. Kampia, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project, the group that filed the complaint.

    The complaint cites press reports quoting Walters in Nevada commenting directly on the marijuana initiative, calling it a "con" and "insulting to the voters of the state."

    "Walters used the authority and influence of his official title to its full advantage," the complaint alleges.

    Steve Fox, an attorney for the Marijuana Policy Project, said that OSC told him their initial investigation would take 2 to 3 months.

    The group also complained to Susan Bilyew, the Nevada Deputy Secretary for Elections, that Walters had not filed election expenditure reports detailing political activities as state law requires.

    ONDCP spokesperson Jennifer DeVallance called the complaint "nothing more than a cheap political stunt."

    DeVallance said that Walters made 15 visits to 10 states in the months before the November elections, some which had marijuana initiatives on the ballot and some which did not.

    DeVallance also said cited the 1998 federal legislation creating ONDCP, which requires the director to "take such action as necessary" to oppose attempts to legalize illicit drugs.

    "When he goes out and does morning news shows, he talks about the fact that legalization efforts are a bad idea," she said.

    Kampia said that the instructions do not give the director permission to violate the Hatch Act and other federal laws.

    A statewide initiative similar to Nevada's failed in Arizona failed in November, as did an Ohio initiative calling for drug treatment and not incarceration for users of cocaine and other drugs.

    Voters approved some local drug initiatives in Massachusetts, California, and Washington, including one directing San Francisco city officials to begin growing marijuana for medical use in violation of federal drug laws.

    --
    This message is encrypted with Quad ROT-13 to protect the author's copyright under the DMCA.
  4. Re:The question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    I want to know where the two posts that pointed this out before this post went to...

  5. To: Whomever modded this "Redundant" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    I'll see you during Meta-Mod.
    --Steve