Agreed.
Thar Diebold POS almost seems like it is designed to be tampered with, but even a good system would still be vulnerable. Who/what could guarantee the system or results are not tampered with, whatever the system is.
Computers are not for everything, and I say this as a computer nerd.
Like here in Finland voting places and in counting of the voting, there are representatives from different parties and organisations. They count the votes together twice (or more if needed), and can wath over each other that nobody is bluffing.
What could be better than this? Sure, it takes manpower, but those machines don't come cheap either (was it $100M in California?)
Still some politicians here too try to push voting machines here too, mostly those who don't know anything about technology.
reply
share
Jonas-14
16 years ago
Ask the Democrats - they screamed bloody murder about these following Florida 2000, and insisted that the poor and minorities stop being discriminated against and be provided with electronic voting machines. Be careful what you wish for, Dems...
reply
share
contact-639
16 years ago
there can be fraud in paper ballot counting too so what's the point of going back in the medieval age and use them
reply
share
mister-rube
15 years ago
Yeah, when you are done filling out your paper ballot, you feed it into a
digital counting-machine. So it really doesn't make any difference now does it?
'Dim X as Integer = 0'
reply
share
groggo
15 years ago
In Canada, voting is done on paper ballots, in polling stations that serve between 700 and 1000 people at most. The ballots are counted by hand and are monitored by electoral officers. Nothing is 'fed into a digital counting machine,' as one poster mentioned above. This system might seem old-fashioned to some, but Canadians, as far as I know, have no serious complaints about it.
reply
share