Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Anyone have the raw number of machines

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
Robert Oak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-14-04 02:31 AM
Original message
Anyone have the raw number of machines
that have actually "malfunctioned"?

I think it would be interesting to run some statistics on the
machines themselves.

Computer errors should be reasonably systematic (i.e. have a pattern)
especially if there is a common software bug which all of them
are running.

I think it would be interesting to do a statistical analysis
of all of the "malfunctions" versus manufacturer type as well
as central tabulator method and see if there is any magic
correlation between this "malfunction" and heavily democratic precincts or battleground states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
lapfog_1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-14-04 02:45 AM
Response to Original message
1. There are so many places to hack the vote

probably the worst place is at the actual polling machines.

All that is needed is for the actual vote to be close (say less
than 5 to 10 percent for the real winner) AND for there to be no
paper trail (or other manual recount trail).

After that, the rest is easy.

For God's sake, they use WINDOWS machines in a lot of places to
do the tabulations (even of the paper and punch card ballots)!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UL_Approved Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-14-04 03:15 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. The paperless machines are themselves Windows based
They use a variant of Windows CE for the touchscreen terminals. If it were me, an embedded system with a whole turnkey operating system would be used. Microcontrollers are manufactured with 10 Base-T NICs and various other networking components. For collection and auditing, Linux or UNIX would be the choice. If you utilize strong cryptography, election results could be tallied in real-time and compared against exit polls in real time. Kind of an interesting concept, huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapfog_1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-14-04 04:12 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. Windows CE is a joke

but it's still easier to hack the vote at the tabulation
machines instead of the polling machines.

I think one possible future idea is to have a voter created paper
ballot. That is, the ballot is created on a website. Voters
download the ballot, make their selections, print the custom
ballot with their specific voter ID printed on it. On election
day the voters take their ballots to the polling station, check
in with the clerk (have their names cross referenced with voter
registration and have their IDs checked). Then each ballot
are marked with their encoded IDs - each page of the ballots!
Those then go to TWO tabulation machines, from two different
manufacturers, and counted. Also, every Nth ballot is pulled
from the tabulation pile and manually checked by voting officials
to include observers from both (or all) parties. If, and only if,
all the results (two tabulations and extrapolation of hand checked
ballots) match closely (within a variance of less than 1 error in
100,000), the vote is then certified.

Everyone can have confidence... the voters can have the confidence
that they selected the candidates and issues they intended. No
one can overvote or undervote, and the tabulations can be verified.

For those without PCs, printers and internet, local libraries can
be used (and colleges, etc) to prepare printed ballots. The only
drawback is that the voters selections are now recorded and identified
to who chose what... but I think that is preferable to what we
have now.

Oh, BTW, this would be a much cheaper solution than anything being
used today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robert Oak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-14-04 03:25 AM
Response to Original message
3. I'm asking for raw info
Which machines "malfunctioned", how many per the total in the precinct,
nationwide, what precincts, what were the resulting errors for those machines and of that type of machine, what is the distribution, nationwide?

You can run a statistical analysis on the errors caught, since they should be basically the same per brand and type of machine and look at the same machines in other precincts and see if there are similar errors.

If it's a software bug, you should see a correlation with all of the machines nationwide.

If it's a GEMS tally machine, you can also see a correlation.

We've seen an error correlation with optical scanners in Florida,
but I'm saying you can also run some statistics nationwide on optical
scanners and see if there is a similar error.

If there is no correlation, but only error with a particular machine in particular battleground states and precincts, it enforces
the anomalies of the vote
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-14-04 04:01 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. or the opposite
What I find interesting is why some machines vote differently than others. For example, the DRE eslates in Texas are one that could accidentally record a vote for Bush after the voter pushed a straight Dem ticket. But I didn't find that peculiarity reported in any of the other places that used eslate. The same is true for most of these "glitches". Why would they be programmed so completely differently from place to place?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shelley806 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-14-04 04:35 AM
Response to Original message
6. Go to Voter's Unite!! They have exactly what you want...
Machine malfunctions are listed separately.

http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp?sort=da...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-15-04 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
7. Interesting question. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 24th 2014, 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC