Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

All the tech luminaries?

That was never my experience. For example see http://homepage.divms.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting/risks.html for a warning about the insecurity of voting machines before the Bush/Gore recount happened. And even then it was old hat among the knowledgeable. For example there was the Nebraska senatorial election that Chuck Hagel stole in 1996. (He resigned as CEO of ES&S in 1995, and won by a wide margin in 1996 in an election counted by ES&S machines despite being behind by an even wider margin in the polls. The machines did not allow a recount. What do YOU think happened?)

Were lots of people singing about the future? Of course. But lots knew that "put it on a computer" isn't a recipe for accuracy when the people who make the computers have a vested interest in the outcome!



> The machines did not allow a recount.

This is insane on so many levels. How would you even technically implement that? You'd have to make an effort to design the system like that.

Why would anyone, anywhere, EVER, put in place a voting system that doesn't allow a recount?

Paper ballots don't magically, invisibly, change over time or suddenly become uncountable or un-inspectable.


Oh, I'm sure that you can think of lots of reasons if your possible motivations include corruption.

Every kind of voting system that has been created has also been corrupted somehow, somewhere.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: