arstechnica.com— Diebold may be considering dumping its e-voting unit, citing bad publicity that is tarnishing the company's reputation. But how much of that bad publicity is Diebold's own fault?
Mar 5, 2007View in Crawl 4
"Somewhere between "All of it" and "More then we'll ever know about."Somewhere between "All of it" and "More than we'll ever know about./grammar nazi :)
Especially since the CEO was a Republican fundraiser."A Diebold plot to rig the elections? Where did that idea come from? The rumors began with this letter from Diebold's CEO, Wally Odell, who was moonlighting as a Republican fundraiser. In his invitation to a benefit for Bush last August, he wrote, "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president."After a public outcry, Odell announced in May that he was getting out of politics. "<a class="user" href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/28/sunday/main632436.shtml">http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/28/sunday/main632436.shtml</a>
Exactly. Simple is better. Paper ballots with an "X" in a box indicating a vote. OCR to read them for initial results, and hand-examination for recounts.Require special pens containing ink of one of a number of chemically tagged varieties (all the same to the eye or scanner) and keep secret which type was used at which polling place. This makes ballot replacement harder; not only would one need to determine the exact number of ballots to replace, but also the ink type. Make that hard to determine without expensive and time consuming tests (eg, varying ratio of stable isotopes of some element).For the visually impaired, they can either bring a relative with them or there can be onhand people from all parties and the voter specifies which party workers they trust.Even if you eliminate the OCR reading and do it all by hand, who cares if it takes a day or a few weeks? That's one reason the election is in early November, not early January; generations ago there wasn't that much of a need for transitioning between administrations (less complex government, fewer appointments to make, etc).IT'S MORE IMPORTANT TO GET THE RESULT RIGHT RATHER THAN FAST
@ropersExactly. Many of the (well-intentioned subset of) proponents of electronic voting are those who work with computers for a living. Having a hammer, to them every problem genuinely looks like a nail.This doesn't mean that there aren't also folks exploiting the Florida problems to try to rig the system.
Or better still, why not use scantron machines?OCR is so good these days, even an elderly great grandfather could draw an X into a big giant box. Then you feed the scantron to the machine, print the matching receipt and give it to the user. This way, the voter has an auditable receipt.I get a goddamn receipt when I buy a cup of coffee, but I don't get one when I elect a government official. Sheesh.
This will allow the DNC/Teamsters Union to go into the voting machine business.There will be no complaining about "stolen" elections, because they'll break your legs if you do.
doublsh0tMar 6, 2007
They're leaving because they lost all their support due to their massive FAILURE in November ^_^good riddance
reddc143cMar 6, 2007
"Somewhere between "All of it" and "More then we'll ever know about."Somewhere between "All of it" and "More than we'll ever know about./grammar nazi :)
leobabyMar 6, 2007
If their ATM's were as secure as their voting machines, they might not even be in business now.
lowrentdiggsMar 6, 2007
Especially since the CEO was a Republican fundraiser."A Diebold plot to rig the elections? Where did that idea come from? The rumors began with this letter from Diebold's CEO, Wally Odell, who was moonlighting as a Republican fundraiser. In his invitation to a benefit for Bush last August, he wrote, "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president."After a public outcry, Odell announced in May that he was getting out of politics. "<a class="user" href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/28/sunday/main632436.shtml">http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/28/sunday/main632436.shtml</a>
andremaMar 6, 2007
Exactly. Simple is better. Paper ballots with an "X" in a box indicating a vote. OCR to read them for initial results, and hand-examination for recounts.Require special pens containing ink of one of a number of chemically tagged varieties (all the same to the eye or scanner) and keep secret which type was used at which polling place. This makes ballot replacement harder; not only would one need to determine the exact number of ballots to replace, but also the ink type. Make that hard to determine without expensive and time consuming tests (eg, varying ratio of stable isotopes of some element).For the visually impaired, they can either bring a relative with them or there can be onhand people from all parties and the voter specifies which party workers they trust.Even if you eliminate the OCR reading and do it all by hand, who cares if it takes a day or a few weeks? That's one reason the election is in early November, not early January; generations ago there wasn't that much of a need for transitioning between administrations (less complex government, fewer appointments to make, etc).IT'S MORE IMPORTANT TO GET THE RESULT RIGHT RATHER THAN FAST
andremaMar 6, 2007
@ropersExactly. Many of the (well-intentioned subset of) proponents of electronic voting are those who work with computers for a living. Having a hammer, to them every problem genuinely looks like a nail.This doesn't mean that there aren't also folks exploiting the Florida problems to try to rig the system.
Closed AccountMar 6, 2007
The worst thing about e-voting machines is that at present they do not come with "let's DU the elections!" button. Down with them!
cbergeronMar 6, 2007
Or better still, why not use scantron machines?OCR is so good these days, even an elderly great grandfather could draw an X into a big giant box. Then you feed the scantron to the machine, print the matching receipt and give it to the user. This way, the voter has an auditable receipt.I get a goddamn receipt when I buy a cup of coffee, but I don't get one when I elect a government official. Sheesh.
epluribusunumMar 7, 2007
This will allow the DNC/Teamsters Union to go into the voting machine business.There will be no complaining about "stolen" elections, because they'll break your legs if you do.