> Having a cellphone != understanding the technology and how it works That wasn't the assertion made, nor related directly to the assertion I responded to. Hav

> Having a cellphone != understanding the technology and how it works That wasn't the assertion made, nor related directly to the assertion I responded to. Having an understanding of "how it works" is a weak way of couching a ton of assumptions without explaining what you mean. There's no point in trying to argue about what's in your head. The statement I take issue with is: > Are computerized elections understandable to laypersons? Yes. How they work at a cursory level of practical operation and effect, is less sophisticated than any cellphone since flip-phones.