Slashdot Mirror


US Voting Machines Standards Open To Public

Online Voting writes "The U.S. Election Assistance Commission has published new voting systems testing and certification standards for 190 days of public comment. For all the critics of electronic voting, this is your opportunity to improve the process. This will be the second version of the federal voting system standards (the first version is the VVSG 05). To learn more about these Voluntary Voting System Standards see this FAQ."

2 of 115 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Sweet by thatskinnyguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Several generations of my family have worked for Diebold. They're a fixture in the community of Canton, Ohio. They're really good at physical security. Hell. They make most of the bank vaults and ATMs that you see.

    But when it comes to voting machines, the only thing that separates the voting machines from their other products is strong bias. Tamper with an ATM at the factory, sure some FDIC bank will lose a few thousand dollars but the one doing the tampering gains nothing. Tampering with a voting machine, the perpetrator stands to influence an election in ways they see fit.

    --
    The game.
  2. Re:big problem by bVork · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sounds like the problem is with your country's implementation of paper ballots, and not the general idea itself. Here in Canada, voting takes maybe half an hour at most. You show up, verify your identity, get your ballot, go behind a screen and put an X in the circle next to the candidate, fold it up, hand it to the person working the box, watch them place the ballot in the box, go home.

    To supervise the whole thing, we require people from multiple parties to be present at the polling station. It's hard to fiddle with something when it has to be verified by two (or more) opposing people at the same time.

    I don't understand your references to multiple ballots. Is each party on a separate ballot or something? Why in the world would it be done like that?