hack247.co.uk— He tells the members how he was hired by Congressman Tom Feeney in 2000 to build a prototype software package that would secretly rig an election to sway the result 51 / 49 to a specified side.
Nov 2, 2006View in Crawl 4
I agree, unless each voting machine is going to give u a receipt that you hand in your vote on, it doesnt have an adequate paper trail that isnt going to be prone to manipulation.
the best part of using the 50+ year old mechanical machines is the cool lever you pull to close a curtain and when you are done it rings a bell. Very low tech and idiot proof.I guess a good question might be how often are ATM's hacked?
The Wikipedia page for this moron is really entertaining"Adam Stubblefield, a computer science graduate student who wrote a paper about Diebold's voting machines, told Wired that Curtis's code would not have been used in any voting machine, even assuming fraud, because (1) Curtis did not have access to any original voting machine source code, and (2) the code that Curtis claims to have written was "so trivial" that it would be easier to write new code than to try to incorporate Curtis's code into the actual voting machine."<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clint_Curtis">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clint_Curtis</a>
As a computer technician myself, I can tell you with out any doubt whatsoever - a punchcard that leaves CHADS are more effective and easier to determine intent of the voter than a magnetic card that can instantaneously lose ALL data. Without a paper trail, which is all Curtis (and most sane people) wants is the only way to safeguard an election.
postal21Nov 2, 2006
I agree, unless each voting machine is going to give u a receipt that you hand in your vote on, it doesnt have an adequate paper trail that isnt going to be prone to manipulation.
saltydog4791Nov 2, 2006
100 lines of code....meh. In ruby I can do this in 2 lines. ;)
jetsetscNov 2, 2006
Contact your representatives to support this bill:<a class="user" href="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?&bill=h109-6200&tab=">http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?&bill=h109-6200&tab=</a>It requires paper and pencil ballots, counted by hand for the 2008 presidential election.-J
videoctNov 3, 2006
the best part of using the 50+ year old mechanical machines is the cool lever you pull to close a curtain and when you are done it rings a bell. Very low tech and idiot proof.I guess a good question might be how often are ATM's hacked?
rkwesqNov 3, 2006
Black Box Voting <a class="user" href="http://www.blackboxvoting.org/">http://www.blackboxvoting.org/</a>
spankaccountNov 3, 2006
The Wikipedia page for this moron is really entertaining"Adam Stubblefield, a computer science graduate student who wrote a paper about Diebold's voting machines, told Wired that Curtis's code would not have been used in any voting machine, even assuming fraud, because (1) Curtis did not have access to any original voting machine source code, and (2) the code that Curtis claims to have written was "so trivial" that it would be easier to write new code than to try to incorporate Curtis's code into the actual voting machine."<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clint_Curtis">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clint_Curtis</a>
truthstreamNov 3, 2006
As a computer technician myself, I can tell you with out any doubt whatsoever - a punchcard that leaves CHADS are more effective and easier to determine intent of the voter than a magnetic card that can instantaneously lose ALL data. Without a paper trail, which is all Curtis (and most sane people) wants is the only way to safeguard an election.
ajdiggNov 7, 2006
I don't think he's lying either....good call.