Slashdot Mirror
Trusted Computing/DMCA vs. Diebold Pentagon Paper
The Importance of writes "Diebold's ill-fated e-voting machines have gotten a lot of coverage recently. Of particular interest is the fact that some of the most damning documents are legal memos leaked from Diebold's law firm, Jones Day. The memos were leaked to the Oakland Tribune. Now Diebold's lawyers are trying to suppress their publication. The judge has ordered the documents returned, except for those already published on the internet. Hopefully, the First Amendment will protect the newspaper's rights to hold onto the documents. However, EFF's Jason Schultz points out a very real and very scary scenario in which trusted computing combined with the DMCA makes such leaks illegal, regardless of the First Amendment."
Now the government is going to allow suppression of freedom of speach, this is not good. America is becoming another Soviet Union, something they were actually trying to avoid. I am seeing a revolution sometime in the near future, it's going to happen, I just know it.
Not only did I post about this yesterday, but I've also submitted stories about the issues with Diebold and the actions of Alameda County officials (Oakland is in Alameda County)
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Anyone who didn't see this distinct possibility as the result of DMCA et. al. either has forcefully inserted their head in the sand or hasn't been paying attention.
Information wants to be free isn't just a hacker hippie value. It's the foundation of western society, from acadamia through government. The sharing of information is fundamental to the stable and just growth of any society.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
I live in Brasil. We have had voting machines in the last 12-14 years (yes, twelve to fourteen -- it depends the size of the city you are in). For the Brazilians here: the first election here in Belo Horizonte to use the machines were the mayoral (and city council, state representation, governor, house and senate) before FHC was elected (as I count it, 2 years + 8 years + 1 1/2 = 11,5 years). I know it, because I was "mesário" (election "table" official? election "clerk"? what is a good English translation?) in the previous election, and in the two subsequent elections). IIRC, there were electronic ballot boxes in Rio and Sao Paulo in the election before that (the only two cities larger than Belo Horizonte). ... when you get your first job. If you are a mandatory voter (literate person from 18 to 65) you have to go to Electoral Court and register to vote. In the process of registering, you receive the "Título de Eleitor" (voter id), in which you have the number of you voting section. To change jobs, and specially to get a government job, you have to prove you are a registered *and* *regularized* voter (you voted in the last election, or regularized your voting situation after it).
Our voting machines are mainly of three different (internally) models: (a) the old ones, that use VirtuOS (*) as the OS, (b) the new ones, that use WinCE as the OS, and (c) the newest and deprecated ones that have the second printer to print your vote, show it to you inside a clear acrilic case, and mix it with others inside the machine.
Externally, all of them look roughly the same: a box similar to the old "portables" of the eighties, with a 5-6" diagonal LCD and a big numerical keypad in the right side of the screen, that has, besides 0-9 keys, "confirma" (ok), "erro" (cancel), and "branco" (white).
The electoral process (from the point of view of the voter) begins
In the election day, you scan the newspapers (or the Superior Electoral Court website), search for the address of your section, and go there. No, there is no transit vote, you can only vote at that address. If you can't get there, you'll have to "justify" your absence.
At the section, you will present your voter id to one the "mesários", and if you don't have it on you, you can still vote (you can show other valid id), but will be delayed. The mesário will search for your name in the vote-ticket sheet, and annex it to your id while you vote. You will sign a receipt in a sheet, and proceed to the voting "booth". Another "mesário" will type your voter id # in a remotely connected keypad, setting the machine in the "ready to vote" mode.
The voting "booth" is really a desk with the voting machine over it, facing nobody else in the room, and sometimes with a cardboard "cover" around it. You will "dial" the numbers of the candidates, in order. when you dial all the digits of one candidate, a star-trek-like chime rings, his/her face will show up in the screen, and if you digited it right, you hit "ok". otherwise, you hit "cancel" and start over. After typing all the candidates, you hit "ok" one last time, the machine chimes again, and goes to "stand by" mode. You have voted. If you don't want to vote for nobody, you can hit "white" instead of the candidate ## (accounted as a "white vote", or "none of the above" -- this is the equivalent of putting your paper ballot in the box without marking anything), or if you really want to protest you can type 9999 or other non-existent-candidate-#, and your vote will be accounted as a "null vote", or "I'm really pissed of" (the equivalent of drawing pictures or writing "improper expletives" in a paper ballot)
Then, you get your id back, your ticket (keep it together with your voter id!!), and you go home. Ah, bars do not open (theoretically) in the election day, so hope you have bought your beer in the day before).
From the point of view of election officials, things are more complicated. The machines arrive to the Electoral Judge (yes, a Judge of Law) pre-prepared one to two months
not voting is the problem. vote however you want, avoid the Democricans and Republicrats if you want, but for the love of god, vote.
if everyone actually got out there and voted, the whole election game would be miles left of where it is now. many with liberal leanings tend to feel dis-enfranchised (see: youth) and dont vote. and they make the system as bad as it is by letting all these assclown republicans actually have the relative support (votes: the only support that matters in the end) for the pranks they're pulling these days.
i think the state should release the names of everyone who doesnt vote. you should be able to track which of your friends vote in some obscenely easy manner(directly through friendster?). maybe just a red mark on everyone's head who doesnt vote.
voting is your civic duty. we have republicans because liberals are too stupid to vote. the election game would be so much better if people actually bothered to vote.
They have a record of donating to both parties. Let's not get into this so very tired "donating to the Republicans" bullshit.
-- Will program for bandwidth
They don't formally arrest you. They make you magically "disappear"--probably to gitmo. Thanks Congress.
They're probably not as nasty about it as Himler and the gestapo were, but I wouldn't want to be noticed by them, either.
There are times when it is worth the (ahem) "extra cost" of not using computers. I think this is one of them, and you have to know when to put the foot down. Insert appropriate Monty Python imagery here.
I don't think I'm alone when I say that managers (and elected politicians are just that, popularly-chosen managers) tend to not be the sharpest bricks in the bag of hammers when it comes to technology.
Lets hear from you -
Since I am from San Diego I know for certain you were not working on your software.
I am assuming that you must have been reading
I find it hard to believe that everyone including the developers are evil at that company. I can only assume the PHB's are not writing the code so if something dishonest was happening I am sure we would hear from an honest developer. Besides you can always vote with paper by using a mail in ballot.
They're not evil--just incompetent. But it's a paycheck.
> Don't get used to the current state of affairs, because it's
> going to get a hell of a lot worse eventually.
Supreme Court Justice Kenneth Starr.
Lifetime appointments last longer than 4 years.
The DMCA does not supercede the constitution. So, until it becomes a consitutional amendment, newspapers and TV stations and anyone else has the right to file a freedom of information request.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
It is interesting to have a look at what these guys want back... So far the Tribune has only touched the surface of these documents.
Included in the set of links at the Bev Harris story linked in the original post is a particularly damning memo
This One
Unfortunately you can't cut and paste the content out of these memos - it turns to garbage... but this one deals with advice to Diebold on how to deal with the State of California's request to produce documents.
It is more than clear from this document that Diebold's lawyers were doing all they could to obstruct this discovery process. The memo states among other things that they want to figure out what the state already has via the original FTP site screw up so as not to get caught out.
They also talk about the "smoking gun" request, opining that their client "may need to obtain emails, if possible, regarding state certification of uncertified software. We need to devise a plan to locate responsive documents to this request."
What do you reckon this means...
Unfortunately, that's not quite the way our system is designed.
It's nearly impossible for somebody who is not affiliated with an established political party to win White House. Simply put, our electoral system requires that the most powerful single-person role in or system have more backing than can be obtained in just one race alone.
See, in order to win the Electoral College vote, a canadate needs a whole lot more than just a plurality of the popular vote. A majority of the Electoral College votes must be captured, and that means one must win a plurality in several states. Having an evenly distributed 5% of the vote will register as a 0 under this scoring system. You'll need to distact at least 40% of the vote, and you'll need to do that in multiple states. Not just more than both the Democratic and Republican candidate, but you'll need to get a majority of the Electoral College "points" to secure a victory.
No non-party candiate has much of a hope of ever pulling that feat. At best, in a 3-man race, the most likely outcome will be a roughly-even split, something along the lines of 38%, 32%, 30%. That kicks our electoral system into overtime...
In such a situation that no ticket gets a majority of the Electoral College, the presidential race kicks to the House Of Representives... in a one-state, one-vote configuration determined by the representives of that state. In short, it'll end up being a party-lines vote going to the side that has a majority in the House.
Anybody who hopes to be president without the Democrats or the Republican Party's help must start their own party, and establish it by winning House seats one-by-one first. They don't need to take a majority control of the congress, they goal is to control a majority of the delegation to the House of at least 20, perferably 26 of 50 states. That way, their candidate needs only win a small number of states to win the election.
Ralph Nader's reputation is to be a "challenge the system" kind of guy, but the electoral system is entrenched in the Constitution and it's going to take an amendment to get it out. It doesn't mandate that we have a 2-party system, but it more or less prevents one individual from taking over the executive branch single-handedly.
A third party should seek a firm control of lower offices before trying to reach for the big one. One Representive it all it takes to filibuster the House, which is almost as effective as a presidential veto.
However there's nothing to stop you from voting for the lesser of two evils at that level and going whichever way you want to at lower levels.
Sure there is: my own conscience.
"Anybody but Bush" is a very, very dangerous path to tread. I'll vote for Kerry if I think I wouldn't mind him as president, but if he pisses me off the way Gore did, a minor party will be getting my vote again.
Then again, I'm in California, so it's not like I'm going to lose the election for the Democrats (latest poll shows Bush's chances in California approaching those of Frosty the Snowman in Malibu). Still, it's the whole idea of voting against instead of voting for that leaves us with no good choices.
Now, if we could just get a decent voting system in place, that would be wonderful. Something like Instant Runoff Voting for example. Then there wouldn't be any of this fear about "throwing away your vote" and the whole peer-pressure thing. You could vote for who you *really* want as your first choice, and then choose your backup options if that guy doesn't make it.
Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
Actually there are instances where the law simply just fails. Remember when Andrew Jackson was President? I believe it was the Cherokee who were trying to hold onto their valuable land. They pleaded their case to the supreme court and ended up winning. They still had to abandon their homes anyways. Why? Because the govt wouldnt enforce the courts judgement. "They've made their decision, now lets see them enforce it." - Andrew Jackson
Fuck you moderators. This is not off topic.
This story is merely a small example of the freedoms we are losing. During the last 55 years, americans have experienced the biggest disillusionment of all time. An extremely young country founded on the ideals of rebels who ran from the imperialist british to create a union of more-free people in less than 200 years has become more socialist and repressive than the british ever were.
The entire political structure of our government encourages only the megalomania-induced power-hungry to become president. There are no incentives to effect true progress. The president has four short years to make a difference. During the last two, the president will spend all of his time marketing himself to the populace for reelection while engaging in back office corporate pandering to keep the ever turning economy gears spinning. If reelection isn't going to happen, then there is no point in doing anything for the future. Look at our budget deficit, SSI shortfall and trade deficit. Each successive presidency has used their childrens money as a high interest credit card in the form of bonds and foreign debts.
Adam Smith, Jefferson, all the greatest financial and political minds of the time knew that the natural tendency of any government is to grow. Growth in many ways. The founding fathers of our country were just men. Everyone now looks at their intentions with respect to the constitution and what they would do(in regards to issues like equal protection for sexual preference and marriage).
Well, wake up people. If our founding fathers were alive today, they would rebel against us. This country hasn't been what they envisioned for a long fucking time. The legal framework was left for us to change our government at will, in accordance with the wishes of the population. The population is so disenchanted with the entire process that they have quit voting entirely.
The problem is self-sustaining though. Simply abstaining from the political process merely lets those in power continue to further their abuses of position. The only way to get people to care anymore is to piss them off.
Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative, whatever. What the population doesn't realize is that the two parties down deep aren't that different. They are two parties, who on the surface have their own agendas, but in reality are very similar.
Put me in a room with the president. Tell me I can come out with impunity and I would walk out alone. That wouldn't really change anything. He would just be replaced by another look-alike self-interest only president. The entire system is broken. Does america need a revolution? Again? Yes. Who would do it? No one. They are all too apathetic. Most people I talk to don't seriously think that their vote counts, or that by voting anything will really change. In fact, most people I know that vote choose the lesser of all evils on the ballot.
Before you judge me, at least learn a few things about me.
I am an American.
I hate our government.
I love our country and what it stands for.
I'm patriotic.
And no, these aren't contradictory.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
Not only not off topic, but indeed pertinent to the most important issue at hand: The hijacking of our constitutional republic and it's slow, steady transformation into a sort of Corporate sponsored theocratic dictatorship. In other words: Keep your powder dry.
This episode casts some doubts on BVQI's validity as a certification service. Their site has no indication that they've ever revoked a certification. Their pitch to companies has no indication that a company can be refused certification. They don't even seem to pull expired certificates.
The auto industry takes ISO 9000 certification of their suppliers seriously. See these standards. Note all the discussion of "revocation", "probation", "non-compliance", and "re-audit". In that world, quality standards violations lose companies the ability to sell to auto companies.
Granted, the DMCA would prevent (legally) decryption of a T.C.-produced/encrypted document, but being able to crack the encryption itself would present large obstacles (think custom-built PCs and a 'cleanroom' (eg: not connected to the net or any other PCs/networks) environment, not to mention the skills/time needed to crack intentionally difficult hashes). T.C. itself would enable the creator/perpetrator to simply send a 'delete' command on that document(s), and every T.C. computer connected to the 'net would happily incinerate all incidences it would *ever* find, as long as the delete command from the document owner still resided on the T.C. authentication servers. It would also be conceivable that a record of each document occurence, along with the PCs'/owners' identity, along with the trail it took to get there could be extracted. That, in my mind, makes the DMCA almost moot in that scenario, in a practical sense, and also scares the beejeezus out of me.
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.