Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

California AG Says He'll Sue Diebold

Posted by timothy on from the hey-no-fair dept.

moby11 points to this Reuters story carried by Yahooo!; it begins "California Attorney General Bill Lockyer said on Tuesday he would sue electronic voting machine maker Diebold Inc. on charges it defrauded the state with false claims about its products."

8 of 394 comments (clear)

  1. Is this the right way to go about it? by Rolloffle · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    I don't always agree with Diebold's method of operations, but they have always been a good company. They build voting machines which aren't necessarily adequately tested, but then very few ever are. They don't deliberately insert loopholes into their electronic voting systems, and it's only because of relentless pounding that a periodic vulnerability is found.

    It isn't right to drag the corporation through the courts just because you have a beef with one of their practices. If Diebold were not an appropriately qualified organisation, California state would have determined that in testing trials and switched to another provider. They aren't the only organisation to provide this civic service.

    1. Re:Is this the right way to go about it? by ljavelin · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      Whoa! Hold on there bud. The court system isn't for everything.

      Want to sue a doctor? No fucking way! Everyone wants to sue the doctor. Malpractice insurance rates means that entry-level doctor can only take home $150,000/year or so. And just because your the doctor made a little mistake and now your back hurts a little... poor you... wimp.

      Doctor suing you because he thinks you owe him more money? Great! That's what the court system is for. He'll burn you with the legal fees alone, and fuck up your credit too! And just because your name is the same as another patient. But you know, the rich suing the poor is OK, because the rich don't sue the poor for the big bucks.

      (PS - A good friend of mine is an MD, so I don't want to hear it)

  2. California / Business -- Not a good combo by dsk052 · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Man I would never and I mean never, open up shop in California! Whatever their state moto is, it should be changed to the "The Sue me State!"

    FLAME ME BABY FLAME ME!!

  3. Re:Upset? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    you're a girlie man.

  4. Re:Upset? by ryanvm · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Guess what, dipshit? Whoever wins the election will be the president next year. Oh, what a horrific conspiracy!!

  5. YOU FAIL IT YOU FAIL IT YOU FAIL IT YOU FAIL IT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    EAT NIGGER DICK HONKY LOL

  6. Re:Upset? by baltimoretim · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Guess what, asshole? As recounted in most of links posted in this thread (and this one: eff whitepaper), whoever controls these machines can determine the "winner" of the next election. Not the voters. When voters may be disenfranchised without knowing about it and without recourse to an audit/recount, that is a horrific conspiracy.

  7. Re:Backdoor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Cause your a dumb fuck?