Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 839 posts

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#311

Post by mountainboy »

lokar wrote: post #162
rpiguyshy wrote: post #14

before donald trump was ever in office, i always believed that these voting machines are complete bullshit. our entire voting system is bullshit. and it would be easy to fix. these machines have been shown to be massively flawed and vulnerable to hacking/tinkering. again, this was my opinion before donald trump was elected.

I had that view for the older direct recording systems with no paper trail. But these seem to record on each machine for a quick count the night of, but then also produce a paper ballot for an audit. Much better. It would be even better if the paper ballot was easy for the voter to quickly validate. But as long as the machine is really just helping you mark a paper ballot, and it's the paper ballot that is "official"…

Except I've seen witnesses testify that on at least some systems, there is a non human readable QR code generated by the ballot-marking-device and it is the QR code that is actually read.

Hopefully you can see the problem with that...

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#312

Post by dionian »

yesdocs wrote: post #8

I hope whatever happens with these lawsuits it chills the baseless accusations of voter fraud used to undermine voter confidence in our democracy

Shutting people up is going to do the opposite. We need to debunk their claims piece by piece to convince the people that are somehow convinced by the evidence

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#313

Post by pdonis »

athenot wrote: post #307
pdonis wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> their machines do generate a paper trail Not the same kind of paper trail that exists when a voter fills out a paper ballot. If I fill out a paper ballot, that ballot is independent evidence of the votes I intended to cast, because I filled it out directly, with no machine in the middle. So that paper ballot is a useful auditing mechanism for checking on machine-generated vote counts. If I electronically cast votes…

Since I voted in Georgia on these machines, the process is the following: - get ID validated & ability to vote - get an initialized smart card - insert in polling machine, fill out stuff - submit, get printout from printer - scan printout into a machine - return smart card At the polling places I was at (we had a runoff), the staff + signage was emphasizing to check results on printout. The printing and the scanning…

So you take the printout from one machine and insert it into another to be scanned? I agree that would satisfy auditability, since you can look at the printout and make sure it's correct.

Were these Dominion voting machines?

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#314

Post by vhold »

javajosh wrote: post #159
tptacek wrote: post #134

Ken White has been talking about the potential for this suit for a couple weeks now. He spends a lot of time talking about what isn't defamation --- people use defamation suits and threats thereof to chill free speech, and he's a 1st Amendment guy --- but the Dominion cases are apparently examples of very serious defamation cases. The core of defamation is (1) a false statement of purported fact that (2) causes damag…

"[Dominion will probable be] treated as a public figure." Why? I'd never heard of them before November 2020, and I imagine that is true for most people. I'd also be curious to learn more about what counts as "reckless disregard for the truth", if you're willing to share.

One way to demonstrate nobody had heard of them: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=d...

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#315

Post by rglover »

unanswered wrote: post #284
dukeofdoom wrote: post #240

Rudy has a YouTube channel, you can hear him make his allegations and judge if it amounts to defamation. Most of them seem to be carefully phrased. https://www.youtube.com/c/RudyWGiuliani/videos Of all the claims that stuck out to me is the suitcase video, since it time corresponds with a one sided spike of votes.

I wish someone would honestly respond to the suitcase video, but I haven't seen any attempted defense of it yet. I would really prefer not to believe Giuliani, and yet that video is pretty damn hard to get around. None of it matters, of course, because realpolitik, and the biggest sin of the viking cosplayers was believing that any of this evidence matters.

Give him a call: https://twitter.com/rglover/status/1339311748726349824

Ralph was in charge at State Farm Arena when those videos were filmed.

Edit: yes, I called him and we spoke back in December for about 30-45 minutes. I originally called about the barriers blocking observers during the recount and then asked about the suitcases as well.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#316

Post by pdonis »

ChrisLomont wrote: post #308
pdonis wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> their machines do generate a paper trail Not the same kind of paper trail that exists when a voter fills out a paper ballot. If I fill out a paper ballot, that ballot is independent evidence of the votes I intended to cast, because I filled it out directly, with no machine in the middle. So that paper ballot is a useful auditing mechanism for checking on machine-generated vote counts. If I electronically cast votes…

Conversely, hand filled out ballots are a mess, often illegible, the hanging chad fiasco, etc. With electronic voting, the voter can (should?) see on a screen exactly what they did, and the machine can make multiple exact copies in electronic and paper formats of that exact result. There is far less ambiguity in the physical record once this has been done.

I agree that if the electronic voting machine is just helping you print out an easily legible copy of your ballot, which you then verify for correctness and take to another machine to have it scanned for counting, that's a good thing, for the reasons you give. Not only does it help with auditability since the physical record is more standardized, it also probably reduces the error rate of automated counting.

What I'm not sure about is whether that is actually the way it is done for all electronic voting machines.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#317

Post by rwmj »

ChrisLomont wrote: post #308
pdonis wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> their machines do generate a paper trail Not the same kind of paper trail that exists when a voter fills out a paper ballot. If I fill out a paper ballot, that ballot is independent evidence of the votes I intended to cast, because I filled it out directly, with no machine in the middle. So that paper ballot is a useful auditing mechanism for checking on machine-generated vote counts. If I electronically cast votes…

Conversely, hand filled out ballots are a mess, often illegible, the hanging chad fiasco, etc. With electronic voting, the voter can (should?) see on a screen exactly what they did, and the machine can make multiple exact copies in electronic and paper formats of that exact result. There is far less ambiguity in the physical record once this has been done.

The UK has paper-only ballots and none of this stuff is a problem. (There are no "hanging chads" because ballots are marked by the voter with a pen or pencil on a piece of paper). The polls close at 10pm, the votes are counted overnight by volunteers, and the winner takes office the next morning. It always baffles me that the US system is so complicated.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#318

Post by pdonis »

rwmj wrote: post #317
ChrisLomont wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conversely, hand filled out ballots are a mess, often illegible, the hanging chad fiasco, etc. With electronic voting, the voter can (should?) see on a screen exactly what they did, and the machine can make multiple exact copies in electronic and paper formats of that exact result. There is far less ambiguity in the physical record once this has been done.

The UK has paper-only ballots and none of this stuff is a problem. (There are no "hanging chads" because ballots are marked by the voter with a pen or pencil on a piece of paper). The polls close at 10pm, the votes are counted overnight by volunteers, and the winner takes office the next morning. It always baffles me that the US system is so complicated.

> There are no "hanging chads" because ballots are marked by the voter with a pen or pencil on a piece of paper

This is how it is done in many US jurisdictions as well (including all the ones I have voted in).

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#319

Post by purchaceallsus »

birdman3131 wrote: post #309
pdonis wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> their machines do generate a paper trail Not the same kind of paper trail that exists when a voter fills out a paper ballot. If I fill out a paper ballot, that ballot is independent evidence of the votes I intended to cast, because I filled it out directly, with no machine in the middle. So that paper ballot is a useful auditing mechanism for checking on machine-generated vote counts. If I electronically cast votes…

Its kinda hard not to see how you voted at least around here. It is printed off in fairly large print on the paper ballot which is then taken to a separate machine to actually tally the votes. (No clue as to the brand used though. At a ~65% trump vote my vote was worthless anyways though so why pay attention to the machines.)

The issue had to do with mail in votes. Those are not viewed by the vote caster when the machine processes them.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#320

Post by throwawaygh »

pupdogg wrote: post #111

The article states that at one point in time, at a voluntary hearing in Michigan, Dominion CEO said "It is technologically impossible to see votes being counted in real-time or to flip them". I think that everybody here is fairly technically inclined so what are your guys thoughts on this? My personal opinion is that using the term "technologically impossible" in this instance was not a good idea. If @antirez is read…

> It is technologically impossible to see votes being counted in real-time or to flip them

Dominion machines aren't on the internet. Dominion doesn't have centralized access to all of their machines.

Could they eg send out an army of technicians to every voting location and use some insane side-channel attack to physically read and flip bits from across the street? Sure. But by that logic it's also "not impossible" for you or I to launch the US nuclear arsenal.

I think saying that "it is technologically possible to see votes being counted in real-time or to flip them" is "technically correct" but obviously not actually correct in any reasonable sense.

Post reply on HN