Perhaps the system should be defunded when instead of teaching math, science, reading comprehension and critical thinking skills it reverts to 72 genders, a child's feelings must never be hurt (thus no grades), and general narcissism.
Nonsense. I would argue that one learns more from propaganda than from the truth. Propaganda presents more information than the truth in many circumstances (like the who, what and why behind those putting out such propaganda). The trick is having critical thinking skills.
The answer is more critical thinking, not less. More information, not less. It's OK to venture outside your bubble and read something you disagree with every now and then.
Because it is prohibitively expensive. It's impossible for local governments to justify spending more money on a piece of equipment that's used once every four years instead of more pressing day to day things like sewer, water, trash pickup, etc. Taxdollars are a finite resource.
Before the internet literally anybody could spread whatever rumor they wanted and there was no way to check for yourself. It wasn't that long ago that such word of mouth was the only way to get any news.
The beauty of the internet is that it allows readers to check multiple sources for any one subject/story, as opposed to just swallowing whatever the legacy media told them to believe. That scares the shit out of them.
It wasn't a problem at all. Neither was the butterfly ballot debacle. That was all about the Gore team calling a bunch of elderly Jewish Democrats in West Palm Beach and convincing them that they had voted for Pat Buchanan by mistake. It was a delay tactic by the Gore team to hold up Florida from certifying their election results until they could come up with a better strategy to contest the entire 2000 election.
Because voting machines sit unplugged in a box and only turned on once every few years, usually by volunteers who have no idea how to update or troubleshoot them. Would you like to pay an extra $5k in taxes per year for 24/7 maintenance and support for such equipment? That's about what it would cost.
Paper ballots WERE the main way of doing things for decades prior to 2000, until Gore needed an excuse for delaying the vote certification in Florida and blamed hanging chads, butterfly ballots, etc. Every push for electronic voting machines can be traced directly back to that.
You are absolutely correct. Voting machines should never be computerized or networked. The old mechanical lever-style machines with manual counts work just fine and are as secure as you can get.
What most people don't realize is that voting equipment is a very expensive burden for the local governments that are responsible for buying them. They get used one day every 2 years, maybe 4. That's why most eqpt is 50 years old and computerizing them is a bad idea (they won't be updated or replaced for decades, usually by elderly volunteers). There simply isn't a budget for these things.
The biggest push for these things is the demand by the media for immediate results. And of course the blaming of hackers by whoever loses whatever election they felt they were owed.
Gotta keep "The Russians Hacked the Election!" myth alive at all costs. Even if it means publicizing the exploit a known vulnerable 15 year-old machine that's not in use anywhere.
I meant to say *after 2000*. This machine and the push for electronic voting in general was a response to the 2000 Presidential recount debacle in Florida.
Depends on the machine. In 2000 most printed a paper ticket that was input and tallied by hand into the central Sec of State's office. Or an SD card. Some even had LAN capabilities but back in 2000 I never heard of anyone using that. It's possible I suppose, but these machines were not widely deployed anywhere.
P.S. I used to work in the electronic voting world.
Slashdot Mirror
No extraction costs? What do you call the $2.8 billion to build the thing? That doesn't even count transmission.
Perhaps the system should be defunded when instead of teaching math, science, reading comprehension and critical thinking skills it reverts to 72 genders, a child's feelings must never be hurt (thus no grades), and general narcissism.
People who would censor "fake news" are far more dangerous than those who put it out. At least the latter allows people a choice.
Yep, the same ones who breathlessly reported on the Gulf of Tonkin incident and Saddam's WMD's.
Nonsense. I would argue that one learns more from propaganda than from the truth. Propaganda presents more information than the truth in many circumstances (like the who, what and why behind those putting out such propaganda). The trick is having critical thinking skills.
Learn how to think critically and you won't be so gullible.
The answer is more critical thinking, not less. More information, not less. It's OK to venture outside your bubble and read something you disagree with every now and then.
Because it is prohibitively expensive. It's impossible for local governments to justify spending more money on a piece of equipment that's used once every four years instead of more pressing day to day things like sewer, water, trash pickup, etc. Taxdollars are a finite resource.
Before the internet literally anybody could spread whatever rumor they wanted and there was no way to check for yourself. It wasn't that long ago that such word of mouth was the only way to get any news.
George Orwell predicted folks like you.
Your "traditional" news sources have given up all journalistic integrity in exchange for agenda pushing activism decades ago.
Do you prefer just being told what to hink and believe by "your betters" in media? Staying informed is your responsibility, this is nothing new.
The beauty of the internet is that it allows readers to check multiple sources for any one subject/story, as opposed to just swallowing whatever the legacy media told them to believe. That scares the shit out of them.
Correct, labeling everything on the internet 'Fake News' is more the death-rattle of the legacy media who have lost all relevancy.
Yet somehow humanity survived just fine before social media even existed. The idiots who destroyed that medium can keep it.
Because it was clickbait nonsense, even by modern Slashdot standards.
It wasn't a problem at all. Neither was the butterfly ballot debacle. That was all about the Gore team calling a bunch of elderly Jewish Democrats in West Palm Beach and convincing them that they had voted for Pat Buchanan by mistake. It was a delay tactic by the Gore team to hold up Florida from certifying their election results until they could come up with a better strategy to contest the entire 2000 election.
I was there, deeply involved in that mess.
Because voting machines sit unplugged in a box and only turned on once every few years, usually by volunteers who have no idea how to update or troubleshoot them. Would you like to pay an extra $5k in taxes per year for 24/7 maintenance and support for such equipment? That's about what it would cost.
Paper ballots WERE the main way of doing things for decades prior to 2000, until Gore needed an excuse for delaying the vote certification in Florida and blamed hanging chads, butterfly ballots, etc. Every push for electronic voting machines can be traced directly back to that.
You are absolutely correct. Voting machines should never be computerized or networked. The old mechanical lever-style machines with manual counts work just fine and are as secure as you can get.
What most people don't realize is that voting equipment is a very expensive burden for the local governments that are responsible for buying them. They get used one day every 2 years, maybe 4. That's why most eqpt is 50 years old and computerizing them is a bad idea (they won't be updated or replaced for decades, usually by elderly volunteers). There simply isn't a budget for these things.
The biggest push for these things is the demand by the media for immediate results. And of course the blaming of hackers by whoever loses whatever election they felt they were owed.
Are you familiar with internal LAN's that aren't connected to the internet? They were a thing when this machine was built 15 years ago.
The machine is from 2001-2003ish.
Gotta keep "The Russians Hacked the Election!" myth alive at all costs. Even if it means publicizing the exploit a known vulnerable 15 year-old machine that's not in use anywhere.
I meant to say *after 2000*. This machine and the push for electronic voting in general was a response to the 2000 Presidential recount debacle in Florida.
Depends on the machine. In 2000 most printed a paper ticket that was input and tallied by hand into the central Sec of State's office. Or an SD card. Some even had LAN capabilities but back in 2000 I never heard of anyone using that. It's possible I suppose, but these machines were not widely deployed anywhere.
P.S. I used to work in the electronic voting world.