Buggy Voting Machines

dkleinsc writes "The NYTimes is running an article arguing in layman's terms that voting machines are inherently buggier (Sperm sample required. Sorry ladies) than most software systems because they are not tested properly. A fun quote: "Extensive discussions are under way at sites like VerifiedVoting.org, CalVoter.org, and the "news for nerds" forum Slashdot.org about inexpensive, practical ways to make automated voting as reliable as, say, buying books online. Their recommendations make sense."" We makese sense? Wah?

Comments

Re:I have a very simple solution!

[bairy]

You mean like, rig the vote by deciding who will win, then doing everything to make sure Bush does?

Yeah like they'd get away with that! Oh, hang on a minute...