Live data from Hacker News

Reddit user captures video of 2012 voting machines altering votes

thenextweb.com

391–400 of 659 posts

Re: Reddit user captures video of 2012 voting machines altering votes

#391
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Anyone who has been paying attention this election cycle knows about the attempts by both sides to manipulate rules about who can vote, when, in ways that advantage themselves and disadvantage each other." Since when have Democrats been passing laws to prevent old white people from voting?

Democrats have tried to increase the length of time early voting happens, increase the hours, and increase the number of voting locations. All of these changes make it easier for people who were on the fence about voting to vote. They do this because they know that people who might or might not vote are much more likely than not to vote Democratic. Thus adding these people to the vote advantages themselves and disadv…

What an aggravating, ignorant, and ahistorical comment.

Besides the responses nearby taking you to task for the sophistry of your last sentence, I feel like it's worth highlighting the very real history of vote suppression in the South under Jim Crow. That's decades of violence, physical intimidation, bogus literacy tests, and a host of other tactics, directed at suppressing the vote of blacks and the poor. At every step of the way, these shameful tactics were justified as some kind of proxy for "intelligence" (and some other "wise" comments here repeat that justification).

Working to increase access to the vote is, in a very real sense, a continuing rejection of these disgusting tactics.

This is why I used the term "ignorant" above. It is as if you do not understand and appreciate the significance of this history. This is not a simple Democrat/Republican issue. Increasing access to the vote is an attempt to remedy, in an imperfect way, the biggest failing of American democracy.

Re: Reddit user captures video of 2012 voting machines altering votes

#392

I know that this will remain at the bottom of this thread, because it doesn't have enough conspiracy theory in it, but does anyone really think that this is actual vote tampering ? I mean, why on earth would you tamper with a voting machine so that it stuffs the ballot, but have it update the UI so that the user can see and report the error? This should fall to the way side of failing basic logic, but it doesn't beca…

It may very well be that changing the UI map is the easiest way to accomplish this. Any particular person may not have access to the backend code, but may have access to the code that maps screen positions to selection.

Having no knowledge of this machine in particular, I can't say much more, but it's certainly feasible that this is the easiest or only method to modify the outcome of a vote.

Based on the description and assuming it's accurate, we could conclude that there is some sort of mapping of the display to vote selection that is configurable locally. This makes sense, as every locality has different ballots - school districts, etc.

We do know that these things tend to be pretty poorly written, so you also can't assume even reasonable or typical component design.

I don't think your logic is valid.

Re: Reddit user captures video of 2012 voting machines altering votes

#393
I never understood why we would go for electronic voting. I couldn't care less about the discussion here about touch screens or GUIs. Computer should have no buisnes for important, secret elections!

In my opinion the risks and downsides of moving away from pen and paper clearly outweigh any of the laughable advantages - unless of course you profit from a system that is in-transparent and manipulatable.

Re: Reddit user captures video of 2012 voting machines altering votes

#394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't denying someone the right to vote a crime?

Not only that, but it is grounds to apply Section 2 of the 14th Amendment. Not many people seem to be aware of the second clause. Basically, it says that any state found to be denying citizens their vote will have their representation in Congress proportionately decreased in accordance with how many people were denied their voting right. All this nonsense about voter IDs, altering votes, making it difficult for peopl…

Your representation of that clause makes it seem the clause has it a bit backwards - how does reducing the representation of a state help to counter the reduced representation of the citizens of that state; doesn't the amendment then enforce the goals of those who're trying to remove representation of individuals at the _national_ level?

If Florida is a state of party 2 voters then party 1 gains by preventing voting, not only do party 2 voters get removed from consideration in the state but the state gets weakened and so support of party 2's ends in congress is reduced?

Or am I misunderstanding? It's the first time I've heard of this part of the 14th amendment.

Re: Reddit user captures video of 2012 voting machines altering votes

#395
post #370
post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4750429

http://www.marionstar.com/article/20121031/NEWS03/310310009/...

I get this in a popup: "We hope you have enjoyed your complimentary access" and some info on becoming a subscriber.

And that's the first time I've visited the site.

Re: Reddit user captures video of 2012 voting machines altering votes

#396

If there were one aspect of electronic voting I could change it would be the following: allow electronic votes to be reviewed by each individual at a later date, from two independent organizations. Each vote gets sent to two independent electronic counting organizations, and each let you verify your vote after the election, with an (anonymous) confirmation number issued at voting time. If enough people cry foul to ru…

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punchscan for an example of one such system which preserves the secret ballot property.

From reading the wiki article it seems that Punchscan allows the voter to prove which way they voted.

Re: Reddit user captures video of 2012 voting machines altering votes

#397

I know that this will remain at the bottom of this thread, because it doesn't have enough conspiracy theory in it, but does anyone really think that this is actual vote tampering ? I mean, why on earth would you tamper with a voting machine so that it stuffs the ballot, but have it update the UI so that the user can see and report the error? This should fall to the way side of failing basic logic, but it doesn't beca…

Plausible deniability?

Re: Reddit user captures video of 2012 voting machines altering votes

#398
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Anyone who has been paying attention this election cycle knows about the attempts by both sides to manipulate rules about who can vote, when, in ways that advantage themselves and disadvantage each other." Since when have Democrats been passing laws to prevent old white people from voting?

Democrats have tried to increase the length of time early voting happens, increase the hours, and increase the number of voting locations. All of these changes make it easier for people who were on the fence about voting to vote. They do this because they know that people who might or might not vote are much more likely than not to vote Democratic. Thus adding these people to the vote advantages themselves and disadv…

Sounds like increasing access to voting, while yes, done with the intent to increase your share, has the added advantage of increasing access to voting, and hence should be encouraged.

Complaining that it's dishonest and wrong is like the joke about "reality having a well known liberal bias"

Re: Reddit user captures video of 2012 voting machines altering votes

#399

The system here in Minnesota works much better. All ballots are paper ballots that are indelibly marked by voters. My wife and I voted this morning in our busy precinct in Minnesota, where there are some tight statewide contests about constitutional amendments and perhaps the most contested race for our state's House of Representatives of any electoral district in our state. As usual, we voted by marking bubble-shape…

The system in Oregon works quite well. In the mail, you get a voter's pamphlet, a ballot to fill out, and two envelopes. You put your name, address, and signature on the outer envelope, put the ballot in the unmarked inner "secrecy" envelope, and put the secrecy envelope in the identifying envelope. The people counting the ballots use the outer envelope to check identity against the list of registered voters (and the list of people who have voted already), then aggregate the secrecy envelopes for validated votes; the latter get counted separately. After election day, you can check an online service to confirm that you voted, just not how you voted.

And to partly answer your question: Oregon makes it a felony to sign someone else's name to the identifying envelope.

Re: Reddit user captures video of 2012 voting machines altering votes

#400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These voting machines flaws were widely reported last election. They always favoured the Republican candidate. Here's court testimony of an developer who was asked to create one of these rigged systems: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVmsaDS_FwY

They don't "always" favor the republican. That's just hyperbole. There have been widespread reports of Romney votes being altered -- days ago. I think our biggest problem is voter registration flaws and the lack of being able to identify that the person listed on the form is the actual one voting. We should also be dipping people's thumbs in ink like they do in Africa and Mexico to ensure that people don't vote twice…

>They don't "always" favor the republican. That's just hyperbole.

I've yet to see a credible instance of vote machine "malfunction" favoring Democrats covered by a reputable source, but if you have any links I'd be interested as it's certainly possible.

>Voter fraud is far more common than alleged insidious voting machine malfunctions.

Due to the nature of electric voting without a paper trail, there's no way to make this assertion as contemporary electronic voting can't be audited.

>Those machines are checked by reps of both parties and under heavy, continual scrutiny.

Not quite.

See: http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/06/experimental-software-discr...

Electronic voting in its current form is a remarkably bad idea. It invites corruption as a scale that requires much more resources than traditional analog voting fraud.

Post reply on HN