[LINK] Computer scientists urge Clinton campaign to challenge election results

[Fernando Cassia]

On 11/23/16, Bernard Robertson-Dunn <brd at iimetro.com.au> wrote:
> Computer scientists urge Clinton campaign to challenge election results
> By Dan Merica, CNN
> November 23, 2016
> http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/22/politics/hillary-clinton-challenge-results/index.html

Old Man Yells at Cloud
http://www.irkitated.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/old-man-yells-at-cloud-simpsons.jpg

In related news:

The Department of Justice is not going to conduct an investigation due
to your phoned-in outrage
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/11/22/the-department-of-justice-is-not-going-to-conduct-a-vote-audit-based-on-your-phoned-in-outrage/

FC
PS: That is exactly the problem with anything based on software. The
malware/tampered firmware machines could have simply reverted back to
the original firmware 2 seconds after delivering the tampered data ==
no evidence of wrongdoing, all checksums match on the software...

PS2: recently I saw someone on a DIY PCB (printed circuit boards)
telling how he once worked for a firm that "for legal reasons" (sic)
had hiim replicate the PCB color (browinsh laminate) as used in 1970s
gambling machines circuit boards "down to the capacitor colors and
some markings on the PCBs". It was clear that this was to deceive some
kind of inspection ... meaning a human looking at the board and
deciding the board was the original one which has not been tampered
... If that's been happening with gambling machines, where the
incentive (for the owner) is making money, why not for elections to
decide our leaders to the higgest bidder?