Slashdot Mirror


Computer Problems Already Affecting Florida Voters

TAGmclaren writes "The Sun-Sentinel is reporting on computer glitches already affecting the election in - you guessed it - Florida. Of the 14 early voting sites that opened in Broward County on Monday morning, 9 were reporting problems. In Orlando County, the touch screens crashed. More generally, SFgate.com is keeping track of all voting issues across the country - including lawsuits and other ballot problems." Update: 10/19 03:38 GMT by T : Thanks to reader Dale J. Russell for pointing out that "there is no Orlando County. The city of Orlando, Florida resides in Orange County."

17 of 688 comments (clear)

  1. That's orange county. by DarkAurora · · Score: 5, Informative

    Orlando is in Orange county.

    1. Re:That's orange county. by madmancarman · · Score: 5, Funny
      Does it imply that products they release may be released on unsupported, buggy platforms?

      You already said they were running on Windows.

      --
      First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Gandhi
    2. Re:That's orange county. by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 5, Funny
      BTW, I suspect that Karl Rove learned long ago that the deadliest propaganda is ... the truth, or at least the facts.

      No, but with luck he might learn that on November 2.

    3. Re:That's orange county. by tool462 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe it just guarantees that all voting machines will be obsolete by the next election, forcing an upgrade path that Diebold hopes they will have the contract for. But, then again, maybe I'm just getting too cynical in my old age.

    4. Re:That's orange county. by kria · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, I was going to moderate on this discussion, but oh well...

      Anyway, I'm a Baptist. And not only do I not think that Bush is annointed by God, but I'm voting for Kerry. I believe that the government has no business regulating morality, really, so I'm voting for the person who I think will do better for the things I think the government should be regulating.

      Just because someone is religious doesn't make them have a head full of mush.

  2. What really bothered me today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Was that I was watching the local news (Washington, DC) and they were discussing electronic voting machines and some of the concerns surrounding them. Then, the reporter ends his report basically blowing the concerns off and saying it was just people were afraid of computers raising a fuss. What? It seems to me that the more people know about computers and know about the systems, the more concerned they are. It's not people afraid of computers and to be dismissed like that simply blows my mind.

    1. Re:What really bothered me today by drlake · · Score: 5, Insightful

      These problems have been known for a long time, and the apathy about them in the news media is simply astounding. A brief web search will give you an idea how widespread the problems are, and how well known they are, yet little has been done. Why do you think that is? Well, elections are run by the states, particularly by each state's Secretary of State. That's an elected position. Guess which party the Secretary of State in most of the problem states is a member of?

    2. Re:What really bothered me today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The point is, there are software practices than can be used to ensure the damn stuff is reliable enough to be used in something as vital as voting. Like writing multiple versions of the code and making sure the results are identical. Like not putting it on top of an overcomplicated OS. Like extreme peer review, including open sourcing the stuff. Any case where voting software goes into production with a line of code which someone has 'forgotten to comment out' is a case where the voting software is not up to standard by a long long way.

  3. Stop 0x0000000A by ctnp · · Score: 5, Funny

    http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNew s/1098121671320_93530871/?hub=World

    "And in Orange County, voting ground to a halt after the touch-screen voting system crashed for about 10 minutes.

    A senior deputy elections supervisor could not explain the brief outage, but speculated a faulty Internet connection may have been to blame."

    Yeeeehaw! Let the games begin.

    1. Re:Stop 0x0000000A by user32.ExitWindowsEx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      why was the touch screen system connected to the internet?

      --
      "Evil will always triumph because good is dumb." -- Dark Helmet
  4. The lawsuits will start coming fast and furious by Infonaut · · Score: 5, Interesting
    As this article states, both major parties have prepared battalions of lawyers across the country in preparation for a close election. It seems the Bush vs. Gore decision wasn't really a decision at all, and we can expect the courts to be intimately involved in American elections for many years to come.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
  5. What they failed to mention... by eviljolly · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Of the 14 early voting sites that opened in Broward County on Monday morning, 9 were reporting problems."

    Upon contacting their support center, the issue was resolved shortly after the operators were instructed to turn the power ON.

    1. Re:What they failed to mention... by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 5, Funny

      Election Official: The system won't work.
      Tech support: What's wrong?
      Official: I just told you, it's not working.
      Tech: How do you know?
      Official: Because when I try to vote, the machine doesn't respond.
      Tech: What does it say on the screen?
      Official: Nothing.
      Tech: Is it on?
      Official: How do I tell?
      Tech: The lights on the front will be lit.
      Official: There are no lights.
      Tech: So it's off? Hit the power button under the lights.
      Official: You're not listening. There are no lights.
      Tech: What do you mean, no lights?
      Official: I mean there are no lights. There's a screen, two buttons, and that's it.
      Tech: Wait - what does your machine look like?
      Official: It's bright red, is made of plastic, and it's about 12 inches by 9 inches. Why?
      Tech: Are you trying to vote on an Etch-a-Sketch?
      Official: Vote?

  6. Re:What's worse by srenker · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I get these images of a huge casino with electronic slot machines
    The Nevada State Gaming Commission (who regulates the slot machines in Las Vegas) was brought in to certify the security of the voting machines there. They found too many holes in Diebold's system and awarded the contract to Sequoia.
    --
    My new /. login is fabu10u$.
  7. these things are great!! by SethJohnson · · Score: 5, Funny



    I'm posting this message from a Florida Voting machine. Browsing under IE is great! Had to download and install flash plugin for a few sites, though. I have no idea why all these posters are saying this electronic voting system is insecure. Everytime these popup windows appear telling me they need to confirm my credit card information, the numbers are displayed as asterisks (*) when I type it in. This voting machine seems plenty secure to me.

  8. Electronic voting in India a lot better! by megazoid81 · · Score: 5, Informative
    The latest election in the world's largest democracy went mostly without glitches. The catch? The election relied heavily on electronic voting machines. To the tune of 380 million people voted on electronic voting machines in India.

    The machines aren't too fancy -- certainly not fancy enough to run bloatware like Windows. However, they follow a simple low-tech protocol that works and shut down if tampered with. And, as with all things India, they cost $200 a pop, compared to $3000 per machines in the U.S.

    The U.S. election authorities can learn a lot from India's last election. Read all about it here.

  9. "flip flop" = a good thing by ThaReetLad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm confused by this flip flop mantra that republicans keep chanting. Surely changing your position on an issue in the face of new evidence is a "Good Thing". It implies an open mind and critical thinking, whereas sticking doggedly to a position that has since been shown to be wrong is just stupid.

    For example, on the Iraq war vote, Kerry voted for the war on the basis of the evidence made available by Bush. We now know that the evidence for war was wrong, incomplete and selectively chosen by a broken system. If you believed the evidence that was presented at the time then voting for war was the only option (as it happens I didn't believe the evidence, but that is a freedom a popularly elected official doesn't really have if he wants to be re-elected). In the light of new evidence it appears that the case for war was not based in fact, but speculation (if you're feeling generous towards Bush), or greed (if you're being less generous). Faced with the new information I would be deeply concerned if someone did not change their point of view. It is a deeply valid thing to do.

    Making a decision on the best available information is a good thing. Making a decision on ideological grounds and the selecting evidence to support your position is not a good thing.

    --
    You can't win Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine