More on the Dangers of eVoting
blamanj writes "A lot of discussion has been focused on the lack of security in electronic voting systems. What hasn't been as widely discussed, is just how tiny the voting manipulations have to be to have an effect. In this months CACM (cite, pdf of original paper is here), some Yale students show that altering only a single vote per machine would have changed the electoral college outcome of the 2000 election. Changing only two votes/machine would have flipped the results for four states."
I was just thinking.
How scary would it be to go to bugzilla.election.gov.us or something and see "BUG #1212 -- Votes from Slashdot readers weighted based on karma"
Jay | http://oldos.org
None of this even mentions the serious problem that one of the people running might actually get elected.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
I am positively amused by the doom and gloom which you have forecast. Thanks; you've made my day. :)
here.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Just because Diebold has said they are committed to delivering votes to George Bush and they make e-voting hardware without an auditing system that a monkey can hack is no reason to suspect everything is less then on the up and up.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Yale students show that altering only a single vote per machine would have changed the electoral college outcome of the 2000 election
You mean Bush would have won?!
Just to bring a further humour to this election (God knows, it needs it), have a look here. In amongst the photos of easy to make Halloween costumes, is this:
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.