37 ms·
If you assume that the team developing the software consists of more than one person, and a hypothetical vote-stuffer wants to minimise the number of people who
by regularfry 14y ago
If you assume that the team developing the software consists of more than one person, and a hypothetical vote-stuffer wants to minimise the number of people who know about the vote-stuffing attempt, they might not have any choice about who on the team actually implements the stuffing. It might be that they only have influence over the guy doing the UI.
Or it could be an attempt at plausible deniability. If all the machines need calibrating, but an uncalibrated machine just so happens to mis-register votes in the direction you want, that would give you an edge because you can guarantee that some machines won't be deployed correctly.
- stevewillows 14y agoIn the video they should have tested for calibration. It suggests that the votes are being forced to Mitt when really the screen is just off. Further to this, why aren't the names randomized?!
- jlgreco 14y ago> "Further to this, why aren't the names randomized?!" Do you know how many millions of lines of code they would need to add to do this? Voting machine manufactures have repeatedly proven themselves the most incompetent people in technology.