[LINK] A 2008 e-Voting Wrapup with Dr. Barbara Simons

Rick Welykochy rick at praxis.com.au
Sat Nov 8 15:51:10 AEDT 2008

Excellent recap of what seemed to be growing into a dire
situation, BRD.

And something for the rest of us to learn by. Pollies please
read on ...

Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:

> A 2008 e-Voting Wrapup with Dr. Barbara Simons
> By James Turner
> November 7, 2008
> O'Reilly
> http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2008/11/a-2008-e-voting-wrapup-with-dr.html


> I was appointed by 
> Senator Harry Reid to one of the four seats on the Election Assistance - 
> on the Board of Advisors which are designated for technologists. 
> However, I really am the only technologist on the Board of Advisors so 
> far as I know. There are no other Computer Scientists on that Board and 
> no Statisticians.

That is a worry. Here is a set of unintegrated, disparate and often
untested and malfunctioning high-tech systems with no Comp Scientists
on the board to analyse the situation and make critiques and take action.

Regarding direct recording machines (esp. sans paper trail) ...

> I mean in Georgia in 2002 was that there were last minute 
> software patches being added to the machines just before the Election 
> and the software patches hadn't really been inspected by any kind of 
> independent agency.


> These are old machines; they're known to have a lot of 
> security problems. They've been examined by independent security experts 
> and they're known to be really problematic.


> Well I mean as you know the software's secret and efforts that have 
> been made by independent computer scientists to look at these machines 
> have frequently been rebuffed;


> In addition, 
> because they have software in them they have to be securely stored and 
> they have to be securely delivered and those create enormous problems 
> especially when you have to worry about delivering large numbers of 
> machines to places prior to the election. Frequently these machines end 
> up staying in people's garages or in churches for periods of time when 
> they're relatively insecure.

(That last bit is a laugh!)

Hrmmmm. All of the above problems vanish with a PAPER BALLOT and a SCANNER.

Seems like after all the spin and vested interests have been served and
finally proved to be charlatans, the good-old paper-based systems with
a reliable built-in (defacto) recount mechanism is the go.

And no one should whine about having to print paper ballots. They are
required for various purposes even if full electronic counting systems
are in place. So why not JUST USE PAPER?

There are many other threads of interest in the interview as posted,
such as early voting, provisional ballots and corruption vs plain old
human error.


Rick Welykochy || Praxis Services || Internet Driving Instructor

When the power of love overcomes the love of power,
the world will know peace.
      -- Jimi Hendrix

More information about the Link mailing list