Windows

High-Tech Politics, Low-Down Cheating

Posted by on Jul 19, 2007 | 10 Comments

Let’s bring up another failed American war (the “war on drugs,” which has been hypocritical from the very start) to talk about marijuana in the courts. Our judges need to smoke more! No, just kidding – I’m not advocating that they inhale anything that can’t be regulated effectively by our government. Only a fool would suggest such a thing.

Stop freaking out, friends – this is actually going to be a TECH related post! Now you can go on with your illusion that I’m nothing more than a simple-minded geek who doesn’t have any right or ability to discuss more serious matters beyond which social network is leeching your identity more.

After reading this recent PC World article, I almost wish I could smoke a natural substance to take my mind off of what’s happening with our country…

The case points to the dangers of electronic voting systems, which make it harder to ensure fair elections, Luke said. Electronic voting machines have been widely adopted in the U.S. since the disputed presidential election of 2000. Laws in California and some other states now require paper records of all votes, but the California law wasn’t in place for the Berkeley election.

This isn’t a joke, people – it’s NOT A JOKE. It doesn’t matter who you want to vote for, there are absolutely no “checks and balances” inherent in the system.

Governments are installing computerized voting systems with no paper record to verify accuracy. Elections will be controlled by companies that do not allow voters to inspect their software. If vote counting becomes privatized, there may be no way to get it back. High-tech vote fraud is already a reality. If you value your vote, you must get this information to your friends – and fast!

Yeah, I’m just a wacky conspiracy theorist… voter fraud couldn’t exist… that’s impossible… couldn’t ever happen… we must trust our government… we should do what we’re told… we should do what we’re told to do…

[tags]vote, voter fraud[/tags]

  • Steve Hobberstad

    Homer Simpson sez: “Sim-ple mine-ded geeeeeeeeeeeeeeek.”
    ;-)

    One thing I haven’t been able to understand in all the times reading about this alert to the dangers of electronic voting is why it’s NECESSARILY any less secure than paper-ballot voting. (BTW: Yes, Chris—it’s just great to have a crossover subject that might not offend the strictly geek-chic among us!)

    Those who are familiar with the translation of real-world activities into the virtual world of computer simulation know that the faithfulness of any such translation is contingent on the programmer’s skill and integrity. The skill factor requires that he has an intimate grasp of the principles underlying the subject he’s trying to translate; the integrity factor requires that the algorithms upon which the program is based reflect those principles without bias.

    For example, a programmer programming a roulette game designs a bitmap representation of a roulette wheel that simulates its real-life counterpart, but more importantly he’s gotta understand the physics of the system (involving the velocity of the marble and friction coefficient of the surface of the wheel) in order to make it behave properly. Just as importantly he’s gotta implement the physics and math that make the system behave properly WITHOUT BIAS.

    In 1990 a Las Vegas whistleblower named Larry Volk was assassinated before he could testify to the fact that he’d been paid to “fix” ROMs for the slot machines he’d been programming for the American Coin Company. While such fixing (in the virtual world) may be more difficult to detect for those not versed in programming it’s no different than the use of magnets, brakes, sliders, mercury, mirrors and light wands to change the outcome of craps, slots and roulette games in the real world.

    The point is: from an oversight perspective, what makes paper ballots any more secure than closely monitored electronic voting when paper ballots can be lost, double-counted, or disqualified (as in the case of the “dangling chad” ballots). Furthermore, a significant number of voters in the last election were themselves “disqualified” (as being felons when they were not) or flat-out prevented from voting (by too-long lines and voting machines which allegedly didn’t work)…which would have been the case no matter which method of balloting was employed.

    Weary of the effects of lobbying (i.e. GRAFT) on “our representatives” I’ve been dreaming of the day when we Americans might be able to vote on an increasing number of bills and measures ourselves, making this a TRULY democratic nation. This would not have been feasible in the days of the founding fathers but as technology progresses such a system is within our reach.

    No system is infallible, especially when humans with ulterior motives are involved; but do we actually know for a fact that electronic voting system CANNOT be made to function as reliably as conventional paper-ballot systems?

  • http://www.rbrunton.ca/BruntonSoft Ron Brunton

    Good morning Chris (it’s Friday morning here in Nova Scotia).

    Even barring conscious conspiracy, the potential for technical errors to produce electoral errors is a very real possibility. Just because a process uses some “advanced” technology does not make it inherently safer or more reliable.

    What has continued to amaze me in the debate about voting machines is the steadfast reliability of putting a pencil mark in a box. Human eyes can inspect that mark to determine whether it is a legitimate vote, a non-vote or a spoiled ballot. The election can be reviewed at a later date ensuring openness and transparency. Its only drawback is that it’s slow. However, why is it so compelling that we must know the results in (Florida or Nova Scotia) before they are cast in (California or British Columbia)? Nothing significant is gained by knowing the results of any federal, provincial, state or municipal election in 4 hours instead of 4 days. All terms of office begin well past the election date.

    There, that’s my addition to your rant. :-)

    Take care.
    Ron

  • Urban Underbrink

    Hi! OK so I do believe ALL our leaders are corrupt!! And also believe that we will be at war against terriorism for a hundred years. Longer than that if the liberals don’t start taking it seriously and stop trying to divide the Nation. All they are doing is embolding our enemies and causing them to fight harder killing more of our troops. They realize we can’t fight effectivly when we are divided. Now we are fighting several countries ( not Iraq ) which are determined to take over the entire globe.

    I have enjoyed getting your newsletter, but hope you keep it free of politics. I get enough misinformation from major news networks already.

    Thanks,
    Urban Underbrink

  • Ken

    Chris, you ARE the weakest link! Both of these issues are old news.

    Besides, the courts treat MJ the way they do because — contrary to right-wing blustering — they are reluctant to ignore the laws adopted by the legislatures and Congress. This issue needs legislative action before the courts will move on it.

    As for the heirs of Richard Dailey, nothing has changed in the last 50 years except the technology. There is a substantial and growing body of literature, technical and otherwise, on the opportunities for fun and games presented by the switch to computerized voting. Indeed, last I checked, a committee of the US House of Representatives was still investigating the last Congressional election in the Sarasota, FL area.

    One wonders what suddenly woke you up — and what moved you to lump these two issues together.

  • http://www.rattlesnakecam.com CJ Murphy

    I do agree with you here… paper ballots are better than computers which can easily be manipulated… this is not a partisan issue. And I don’t think you only have a simple geek mind… Lockergnome is geek info… you can also start a political newsletter.. or section of Lockergnome that is for your opinions…and other political thought… then we can all post comments there.. that would be very interesting!!! Call it Poli-techgnone!!

  • Frank Kenisky

    You tell’em Chris! We have been living in a country dominated by FEAR! And we let it happen to us like the Grimm’s Brothers, “Pied Piper of Hamelin”. We got sucked into this like the knee jerk posse going after the wrong guy then looking like we were not the ones responsible!

    People need to look beyond the scope of their own narrow existence to see the whole picture because verse didn’t last through the ages because it only occurred once. It came from the stupidity of people who act together foolishly!

    The movie Men In Black in the scene where Kay tells Edwards, “A person is smart, people are dumb”, couldn’t be a more true statement. Why do we form committees or hold meetings? So the majority can all get together and do what is right for all the people. But in most cases today people don’t know or want to know the truth. We hear only what we want the whole story is boring.

    9-11 turned my country into a zombie.

  • Kish

    Wow. drugs anti-govt hate….. hmmmm and i thought I was getting
    cool computer tips all these years. Is this all a conspiracy to get me to like drugs and hate the government?

  • Ben Oddo

    I’m sure voting fraud exists. How else can you explain George W. Bush getting “re-elected” in 2004. I think voting fraud an easier pill to swallow and a situation that is easier to correct than the question posed by a London newspaper headline on the day after Election Day 2004: “How can 59 million Americans be so Dumb?”

  • Bob

    Keep um coming Chris. You’re right on target.

  • Lostdoggie

    Wow, Chris! What have you been smoking,swallowing or injecting and for how long. How nuveau Unamerican! Drugs may not be bad and elections are being rigged! You should be banned to Canada.

    Here we grow the world’s strongest pot, try to keep elections at least appear honest and HORRORS, over 80% of the population believe the shrub from Texas is a wingnut. You will fit right in.

    Unfortunately you are being faked out by a side issue. The real problem in any 2 party system is the eventual coagulation of the parties into one. Thus Canada is run by the Liberal Conservatives, the United Kingdom by the Labour Conservatives and the US of A by the Republican Democrats. This party consists of the good cops and the bad cops. When the votes are counted enough good cops side with the bad cops to pass legislation opposed by the majority of voters.

    In our mature democracies all that is needed to govern is 50% plus one, while pseudo democracies decide everything with 95% majorities. It should be obvious that this can only change by becoming a multi-party state again. This is a real problem, but it needs a solution. This is complicated by people not recognizing problems, or wanting to sweep them under the rug because not doing so will enable things like giving support to the enemies.

    Let me remind younger people of the old Walt Kelly cartoon called Pogo. It had an often repeated refrain. “We have met the enemy and he is us.”