What is Digg?121 Comments
- cuposmuck, on 10/12/2007, -9/+75right like anyone who likes/still works for feeney is going to testify against him in court...
Just cause the guy is a scumbag does not mean that his isnt telling the truth about another scumbag... think of all the criminals that have testified against other criminals... its simply means that u need to double check him...
So given that i have also seen the code to hack the voting machines ... my guess is he didn't lie... - Spoonicus, on 10/12/2007, -8/+51Nice system you've got there USA.. long live the punch card!
- Djerrid, on 10/12/2007, -2/+36He's currently in a dead heat with his former employer:
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=74856
"Computer programmer, vote-rigging whistleblower and congressional candidate Clint Curtis is now tied with GOP Congressman Tom Feeney, who allegedly asked him to create electronic election-flipping software!" - trance, on 10/12/2007, -2/+32Clint Curtis and Vote Fraud
Alex Babcock at the Seminole Chronicle reported that former Yang Enterprises computer programmer Clint Curtis made sworn testimony in front of the House Judiciary Committee in December 2004. Curtis testified that in September of 2000, Tom Feeney asked him to write software that could alter vote totals on touch-screen voting machines. The Judicial Committee was "investigating allegations of voter fraud in the 2004 presidential election involving touch-screen voting in Ohio." and was not looking into issues of Florida vote fraud. [10]
Feeney and Yang Enterprises deny Curtis' testimony. Babcock wrote, "Michael O'Quinn, an attorney for Yang Enterprises, said Curtis' claims are outrageous and that Feeney never discussed such a program with the company. He said Feeney's only relationship with the company was as its legal counsel. Feeney worked at the law firm with O'Quinn until 2002, when he resigned after being elected to Congress." Feeney is also accused of helping Yang Enterprises secure government contracts. [11]
In March 2005, Curtis passed a polygraph test regarding his tesimony, though there has been no serious investigation into the matter. Curtis' charges are largely treated as baseless consipracy theory by the St. Petersburg Times and mainstream media. [12]
As of April 2006, the issue is still unsettled, but Curtis is running against Feeney in the fall election largely on a platform of non-corruption. The Republican-leaning Curtis states,
"I believe our district is currently represented by one of the most corrupt politicians in history. I have attended closed-door meetings where Congressman Tom Feeney spoke candidly about altering election results. Feeney is deeply involved with individuals like super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff and has been an active participant in this unprecedented decade of corruption."[13]
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tom_Feeney - richfiddler11, on 10/12/2007, -4/+33Look -- in an election where the margin of victory is smaller than the margin of error, the outcome goes against exit polling data, etc. there *should* be close scrutiny.
It's utter BS to cast those who want to take a close a look as 3rd world rabble.
The real problem is that a group in power is expoiting an intentional loophole in an intentionally poorly designed system.
Do you think it's that hard to design a secure voting system with a hard-copy audit trail?
Not at all -- examples:
- banking machines are secure and are completely auditable (ironically made by Diebold).
- electronic gambling (video poker, etc). Most people would be surprised at the level of security, line-by-line code scrutiny and certification required.
In gaming systems a long hash key is generated at certification time. The system periodically hashes all its code segments in memory and compares it against the code in a read-only device, so it is very difficult to add hacks to the system.
The point is, shouldn't our voting systems be as well designed and certified as gambling machines? Technology is not the problem (Ubuntu's got nothing to do with it BTW) it's a matter of setting up the rules.
But of course if one party makes all the rules, they will typically make decisions that help them stay in power. - netdroid9, on 10/12/2007, -1/+28It depends. If he was under the impression that he was supposed to test the election software against potential attacks (and to provide an example program), but later found out that his software was to be used to rig elections...
- 4Prophecy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+31It was in 2004 - October, if I remember correctly.
With that in mind I think this about demonstrates what's screwed up with congress and the electoral process right now. - synchrotron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+27What was wrong with a pen and a piece of paper - marking your balot with an X in the box next to a name?
Very much more difficult to hack. - Spoonicus, on 10/12/2007, -5/+30Sarcasm is beyond you..
- corporate70, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25Imagine the media frenzie when Curtis wins 51-49
- zediker, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25@netdroid9:
If I remember correctly, that was his original purpose, to test the software, but when he turned it in, the person whom clint turned it into said something that made him suspect foul use of his code. By 'something' I mean just shy of actualy verbaly confirming the intent for voter fraud. - baalzebub, on 10/12/2007, -2/+23that is just part of the darker side of government to usurp more power at the expense of honesty & integrity and the US Citizens.
such corruption can cause revolts and war... - 955701, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21You have your facts wrong. He took the job to identify vulnerabilities in the election system, and while working towards that end, his employer clarified that they were trying to rig the election, not identify and publicly demonstrate the security issues.
So who's more of a scumbag, a man who, upon seeing corruption in politics chooses to run for office, or some no-name from the peanut gallery spreading misinformation? - vudicarus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18does anyone know when this testimony took place?
- GuernUK, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19Welcome to third world America...where the country is defined as a 'democracy', but in reality there is no real democratic process. Instead minority elites continually relinquish control through peddling vacuous media hype, hidden corporate sponsorship, shameless self promotion...and now direct vote rigging.
- EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18I don't get how people can call Curtis a crook and not Feeney. If Curtis did try to hack elections, knowingly or not, then Feeney is more guilty -- for being a mastermind as opposed to a lowly operative who may or may not have known the plan.
Curtis at least had the decency to become a whistleblower to stop it. And what better way to stop Feeney than to defeat him in an election? - twygallypuff, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15can but won't. the american people have become too complacent and lazy to give a damn anymore. what we care most about is entertainment and "feeling good", not freedom.
"What would those American ladies do without their diamonds..." - Shadar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11I actually live in this district where Feeney & Curtis are running. Feeney is such a completely horrible congressman... he cares nothing about our district, all he cares about is power.
The worst part is, Curtis has absolutely 0 chance to win... (unless of course he writes the software to fix his own election). I don't think anyone in this district even knows who Curtis is... Feeney has been using millions to smear him. I've seen about 50 Feeney ads in the past month and 0 Curtis ads, that's how lopsided the money situation is.
It's a shame... because Feeney needs to go. - Bumpoh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Yes its possible with the paper and pen method for someone to miscount, but the area that they have the ability to cause damage is greatly reduced, due to the lower amounts of votes that each individual handles. Also with paper and pen you have a "paper trail" which makes doing a recount a whole lot easier than with a machine that it has been shown possible to hack without even leaving a trace.
- orientis, on 10/12/2007, -7/+17Sad but true. I admire the principles behind the USA: The US Constitution is a beautiful document. It's just a shame you have a bunch of megarich arseholes who don't give a ***** for the Democracy, let alone the US of A, running the country into the ground.
***** it, bring on Chinese rule. - kitkatsavvy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13All we do here in Australia is just write 1 to 4 (or just 1) in the boxes for each candidate. After that, they have several people to count each vote.... There is no rigging here at all - I don't see how hard it would be for America to get rid of the punch card system and just go for something easier - they also need to make the writing bigger and clearer for everyone to read it....
One day I hope they change their system... oh yeah - why don't you get plastic money notes instead of paper ones too - that will stop a lot of counterfeiting....
go australia!!! - Hellsmk2, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10You're part of the problem. Fool.
- cramtod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8> Exit polls can not be accurate.
If the exit poll differs from the vote, one should not just throw out the exit poll. Exit polls are one of the major indicators used to determine the level of fraud in an election. They are used internationally, and given the debacle in 2000 and 2004, they should be used here.
If the exit poll differs too much from the vote, one must both examine the exit poll to determine if it was accurate and examine the election for fraud. - Obvioustroll, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8The problem is that in the USA we vote on dozens of issues in every election. Last election, my ballot was 9-10 pages long.
- spliffy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8as an american i can say this is 100% true. there is no chance for revolt here.
- slushpuppie, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12 Begging the question:
But, what if it was fixed? - rjey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,66002,00.html
"Some details of Curtis' statements don't check out. West Palm Beach city didn't use touch-screen machines in 2000, something Curtis didn't know when Wired News spoke to him."
Book deal made him make this all up, it is all about the money. - zediker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Seriously though, we just need a better punch card. Its almost impossible to secure an electronic machine, especially when the company who makes the machines is not open to public scrutiny when it comes to the hardware and software.
- brianjlowry, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9So if Curtis built the software to rig an election, he shouldn't have any issues winning if I don't cast my vote for him.
- polyGone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"The whole purpose of it was to level the playing field between citizens and a potentially violent and oppressive government." Good Point
I think this is a point missed out on back when there were the series of Gun Bans and the push for them. Everyone used to say, "Why do you need assault rifles for hunting?" That law was not there to protect hunters, it was there to protect the people from an oppressive government. Of course the media painted anyone who didn't want guns for hunting as potentially violent people with malicious intent. That was another step the machine was taking in order to make sure the people don't get any ideas. SAD.
If we don't find a way to keep the media in check, people will always distort and spin issues into what the government wants. I can guarantee that most Americans have no idea what has been going on all around them for years. People have no attention span and the media makes things worse. They refuse to debate the issues and make it seem like facts are up for debate. Amongst the confusion of the media and the overall fast pace of our daily lives, our country has fallen to a small group of powerful men. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7People like you highlight the problem with voting and politics in this country.
Back in the 60's and 70's voter awareness was at an all-time high. There were divisive issues that unified great swaths of US citizens and put them at odds on huge issues. Back then, people actually gave a ***** about what was going on in this country. These days people are becoming jaded and distrustful of the systems that govern them. Some say that democracy is dead in this country, and that just reflects the average joe's opinion that their vote just doesn't count anymore.
I'm beginning to wonder about this myself. The worst thing that could happen to this country is for people to feel such a disconnect between them and their representatives in government that they just give up and stop voting. This kind of defeatist mentality is exactly what career politicians and the corporations that own them dream of. - polyGone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Because then your an enemy combatant against an army that is beyond technologicly advanced. 10,000 US citizens Vs. F16 will result in 10,000 less citizens.
- ChileanGoD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Some humans have lost the ability to count ballots.
- michaelb1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Did anyone notice that this video shows a court room and has sound but you never see anyone talking?
Its almost like a voice over of a hand held amateur video.
I could easily dub the video to and call it "The OJ confession" - Bob042, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6So, what's it going to take to get this electronic voting machine thing to be fixed? A landslide victory for Mickey Mouse?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Very easy for the guy counting it to miss a few, or miscount.
- willistg, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7you know, I know this all sounds unbelievable and stuff, but for all those trying to debunk this story with statements that were already been debunked 2 years ago , what the hell is your problem?
This interweb is great for research...
http://www.google.com/search?q=Clinton+Eugene+Curtis&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Yielded this in under 10 seconds.
http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/Clinton_Curtis
"Yang Enterprises Inc. issued a statement on December 10, 2004 on their website (http://yangenterprises.com/) - saying:
Recently there have been several accusations against this corporation by Clinton Eugene Curtis. All of the allegations are 100% FALSE!! An official statement will be forthcoming. Thank you for your concern and God Bless America.
That statement has since been debunked by BRAD BLOG (http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001054.htm) in a series of reports (http://www.BradBlog.com/clintcurtis.htm) which include hard evidence from public records request that show that YEI was lying in several instances in their full statement. "
Oh but I guess that's all lies too eh? I mean the source isn't some respectable 24/7 opinion show about stupid *****. But at least the Bradblog stuff claims to have hard evidence which is a matter of public record and it seems pretty even handed to me.
So do some research.
As far as the electronic voting goes, there have been plenty of other stories(on digg no less) about how insecure the whole system is, and the various attack vectors that one can use. I believe it is intentionally so. Why? because technology exists to make for a secure voting system. To me it seems the same infrastructure that is used for banking transactions could easily be adapted to voting(hey I think there's a company that makes ATMS and Voting Machines). Even if that wasn't possible the very existence of reliable software such as what is used in banking and trading demonstrates that it is possible. So, we citizens have to ask ourselves Why don't the elections run on a system that is at least trusted and perceivably reliable as an atm or a point of sale system? And we should demand a system that is more reliable and hold those decision makers accountable for the decisions and demand that they correct it, or call up on the citizens who have the necessary expertise to correct it.
This isn't just to safe guard against one party rigging the election vs. another. If the election is indeed hackable, I could imagine that there are all sorts of organizations that would love to control the outcome. From organized crime to country sponsored espionage.
This isn't a partisan issue this is a USA issue - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@polygone:
Your argument directly nullifies the 2nd Amendment which allows US citizens the right to own weaponry (guns). I'm in total agreement with you. Back when the 2nd Amendment was added, it made sense at the time. The whole purpose of it was to level the playing field between citizens and a potentially violent and oppressive government. However, this only makes sense in the context of fairness, where both sides (citizens and government military) have access to the exact same weaponry. That fairness hasn't existed for at least a century.
When was the last time you could purchase a Joint Strike Fighter? An M1-A1 Abrams? The military and police force have access to weaponry so far beyond the scope of the average citizen that no citizen stands a chance. I suppose every American toting an AK47 would be a force to be reckoned with, but that just won't happen, ever.
I say either abolish the 2nd Amendment or give any normal citizen complete and total access to all advanced weaponry. - krasht, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4To add to that, here in the Australia Capital Territory, we have electronic voting for the local Legislative assembly. It was only available at a few polling places (government shop fronts) and there was a paper trail from memory. They didn't want to implement it everywhere, because their internal testing procedures had shown that some people had trouble understanding the easiest of systems. Otherwise it's just paper and pencils and by the end of the first night, post electoral results are usually known, with close votes usually being double checked and taking few days longer in some cases.
- Bumpoh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@noreturn
Yes while the population of america is hugely larger than australia, it is a simple scaling equation, you are larger which means you also have a larger potential pool of people to work at counting the votes....
Also, australia has compulsory Voting, which in effect doubles our effective population in regards to america, as i remember you have about a %50-60 voter turn out, whereas we have %98 or something like that, giving us an effective (i wish i knew how to italicise that) of about 37-38 million or something.... which doesnt even it, but makes it a bit closer - LMControl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5So, if Democrats come into power as everyone in the media predicts, what does this say for those who insist all this electronic voting is rigged? Not trying to be sarcastic, but Digg seems to be full of people who think there's no way Repubs can lose because they have hired all of these l33t 4@x0r5 and have Diebold in the pocket.
- ByteGuerilla, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Mouse/Duck for 2012! It's a golden ticket I tells ya.
- elebrio, on 10/12/2007, -39/+43This guy is a joke. He was fired by Feeney and has an ax to grind... you can read more about his self aggrandisement here. http://clintcurtis.com now hes running for congress.
Think about the time line... He took a job to "rig the election" then he gets fired and testifies... then runs for congress. Would you vote for a guy willing to take a job to "rig an election"? Dem Rep Ind Lib doesn't matter to me he sounds like a scumbag. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The argument that punch cards were confusing is *****. If you can't understand the world's simplest voting system, go home and drink some rat poison, you're already brain dead.
Confusing. Feh. The people that said it was confusing were probably the same people that stand in line at In&Out Burger, bewildered by the vast array of options.*
*note to everyone about In&Out Burger..they have 3 options displayed on the menu and dozens of hidden ones that are just 'known'. Simplest menu ever. - corporate70, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Why are we even using electronic voting machines? Is this any better than hanging chads in Florida?
Just outside of NYC, in Long Island, they use the same mechanical voting machines they have used since the 50's. Pull a lever and it rotates a counter. At the end of the day the numbers from the machine are written down (by members of both parties) and submitted to the county.
Its hard to screw that up. - GabrielS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Clint Curtis didn't testify in a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee. The committee convened in Ohio, where Curtis testifed, has no affiliation with the US Congress whatsoever. None of it is part of the official congressional record because it is not an officially recognized act of the US Congress.
- poet_will, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I believe Australia has a law mandating people to vote. If you don't vote you get a fine. That is why 95% of people eligible to vote actually vote. Compare that to about 30% for the US.
Also, if we have so many more people than Australia, then we have more people to count ballots. - richfiddler11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yeah, and even a lowly cash register in a supermarket prints out a running transaction record on paper that can be audited after the fact.
This would work:
- voter makes selections
- transaction is printed on receipt (continuous paper tape)
- printed receipt shows up under glass window
- voter examines and validates that printed record is correct
or
- transaction is validated and start again - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4It's not about code quality if you've got a programmer in your pocket.
Of course, open source would stop that, while opening a whole other can of worms - spliffy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5i saw this about 6 months ago. it is funny how this footage was available for 2 years. even if this lacks credibility it was never disproven, yet it has never really been brought up to the general public, as say news of some kind or something...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 120 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is