Why should I NOT be paranoid about paperless voting machines?

[Carmady]

@XT

I’m sure ‘they’ do say that. I’ve seen no actual evidence that the machines WERE hacked to any large degree, and I’d be the last person to say don’t worry about hackers and what they can do (in our case, the machines themselves aren’t connected to a network, so it’s moot…but the poll workers laptops ARE connected to a network, and the data they are accessing is certainly available to hacking or modification…or denial of service type attacks if someone wanted to disrupt things. Of course, that would go for paper OR electronic ballots, so…). Interestingly enough, at least in a lot of the county systems I’ve seen, the hacking of the voting machines would be the least of your worries.

So, to be clear, you agree with the cited experts that the machines can be hacked easily without leaving a trace, and that votes can easily be manipulated.

You agree with Germany ruling their 2005 election unconstitutional due to the machines being unreliable.

You agree with Ireland selling their voting machines for scrap metal, you agree with Canada refusing to use such machines.

But you think that there is no point fixing this problem, because there are also other problems? Incidentally, yes, I know there are many other problems with our voting system. But this thread was specifically about the voting machines, and the existence of other problems doesn’t mean we should let this one continue.

[XT]

[QUOTE=Carmady]
So, to be clear, you agree with the cited experts that the machines can be hacked easily without leaving a trace, and that votes can easily be manipulated.
[/QUOTE]

Depends on the machine, and how it’s connected…and what it’s connected too. I believe it wouldn’t be an insurmountable challenge to hack a machine though…but I think that if you did it obviously, and to enough machines, it would raise red flags with the election officials. Like the machine reported in the media that was changing all Obama votes to Romney votes.

You agree with Germany ruling their 2005 election unconstitutional due to the machines being unreliable.

I have no idea what is or isn’t constitutional in Germany, so I’m not sure where you get that I agree with that. I don’t believe that the machines, per se, are unreliable. No more so than any other voting machines. They CAN be, but not ipso facto.

You agree with Ireland selling their voting machines for scrap metal, you agree with Canada refusing to use such machines.

See above.

But you think that there is no point fixing this problem, because there are also other problems? Incidentally, yes, I know there are many other problems with our voting system. But this thread was specifically about the voting machines, and the existence of other problems doesn’t mean we should let this one continue.

I think there are more pressing issues to be addressing than this one wrt the voting system overall. If this thread is merely focused on voting machines and only voting machines, then I’ve given my two cents worth…and a bargain at double the price…already, so I’ll bow out, especially after the rather nasty back and forth between me and BlackKnight earlier. I tend to react badly when someone calls me dishonest, and perhaps went a bit over the top there.

[suranyi]

@gatorslap

What’s wrong with having a machine count paper ballots, rather than voting directly on a machine?

That’s exactly what we have in my county in California.

[BigT]

@XT

:rolleyes:

You said this:

That seems to be hand waving the seriousness of the data away from where I’m sitting. You can take your ‘You are a dishonest individual’ horseshit and shove it sideways up your ass.

And that is MY last response to you on this. I attempted to give you my honest take on things, and you say this sort of shit? Well, fine by me.

No, your first post in the thread was to call the OP stupid. Then when it was pointed out that many intelligent people have the same opinion, you still rattled on about how stupid everyone was. You provided no actual citations or fact to back up your argument. And then you kept saying that he found something completely unimportant when all he said was that it wasn’t as important, and explained his reasoning. Reasoning you never actually rebutted, and instead went on about how stupid people who believe what he believe are.

You started the shit. Don’t whine when someone else finishes it for you.

[Measure_for_Measure]

@XT

Suit yourself. If you want to believe that the major threat to the republic is from hacked voting machines, and that my points are the cosmetic problems but the REAL problem is those machines, that’s your affair. We’ll see how casual you are about things if your ‘tax records’ (which include little things like your home address, social security information, etc etc) get hacked sometime…or if the voting server used by those poll workers gets hacked or a denial of service attack is launched at your counties network.

1a. How can you go on about stolen tax records when our soldiers are dying in Afghanistan? Don’t you know there’s a war going on?

1b. In other words, pointing to one problem doesn’t obviate the need to address another problem.

2. That said, I’ve been the victim of identity theft. Twice. Social security numbers, complete with address etc. go for less than a dollar a pop on the black market. The tax record problem is a heck of a lot milder than the one we face at our friendly local or not-so-local financial institution – although yeah I very much would like it if the authorities focused more on this particular set of crimes.

3. Screwing up the democratic process is far more pernicious.

4. Alleged Vote flipping needs to be addressed.

5. We really need a blue ribbon panel.

6. I am not an expert, but I like the scantron solution as well. Apparently it has a lower error rate than the old voting booths, IIRC. And it can be verified by a hand count. Also, if international election inspectors want to keep an eye on things, they should be permitted to do so even in Texas.

7. Recommended blog on computer security: http://krebsonsecurity.com/

8. Websites on voting which I googled, but have not explored:
   Electronic Voting
   http://www.electronic-vote.org/
   NPR story: Electronic Voting More Secure, But Concerns Remain : NPR

[gamerunknown]

Clearly it is the Democrats encouraging voter fraud. They propose paper ballots because their loyal poll workers can claim huge margins of victory when counting them. Computers are objective. They don’t lie (unless they’ve been programmed to lie, like 538).

[tagos]

@gamerunknown

Clearly it is the Democrats encouraging voter fraud. They propose paper ballots because their loyal poll workers can claim huge margins of victory when counting them. Computers are objective. They don’t lie (unless they’ve been programmed to lie, like 538).

You’re citing Free Republic?

Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha

(pauses for breath)

Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.

[XT]

[QUOTE=Measure for Measure
]
1b. In other words, pointing to one problem doesn’t obviate the need to address another problem.
[/QUOTE]

Damn shame that the Republicans managed to steal the election from Obama, isn’t it? Oh, wait…that didn’t happen, did it? Oh, well, I’m sure that their nefarious vote stealing machines managed to skew the election, right? But, didn’t I see a thread stating that Nate Silver was dead on the money with his predictions? Which would mean…what? That he factored in the exact number of vote stealing machines into his equations, right?

[QUOTE=BigT]
No, your first post in the thread was to call the OP stupid. Then when it was pointed out that many intelligent people have the same opinion, you still rattled on about how stupid everyone was. You provided no actual citations or fact to back up your argument. And then you kept saying that he found something completely unimportant when all he said was that it wasn’t as important, and explained his reasoning. Reasoning you never actually rebutted, and instead went on about how stupid people who believe what he believe are
[/QUOTE]

Ah, I see your confusion. First off, here’s me saying the OP is stupid: “This OP is a load of horseshit”…THAT’S how I say something is stupid in my own charming way. What I actually said was that the OP was fretting about something that was minor when there are much larger issues. And, wow…seems I was right, unless one of your fretter types wants to explain to me the election we watched last night in the context of pernicious vote stealing machines.

Sadly, you didn’t actually read any of my posts, which is why you feel I’m calling people stupid and that I made no counter arguments. You may not agree with my arguments, but saying I didn’t make any sort of clues one into the fact you didn’t actually bother reading what I wrote.

You started the shit. Don’t whine when someone else finishes it for you.

Yeah, and such a good finishing move there calling me dishonest and then storming out of the thread. Very effective. You are right though…I started the shit of pointing out that the OP and others in this thread are worried about the stains on their teeth while smoking those 3 packs a day. Or, of course, maybe the Republicans deliberately used their vicious machines to make Nate Silver’s predictions right and give the win to Obama because they know that Jesus is coming down next month to end the world with his Mayan henchmen…