5 ms·
As suggested, releasing the raw data as input would be better than the source code anyway. The raw data should not have any 'trade secret' or 'hack vulnerabilit
by sgryphon 12y ago
As suggested, releasing the raw data as input would be better than the source code anyway. The raw data should not have any 'trade secret' or 'hack vulnerability'.
Vote for it on data.gov.au https://datagovau.ideascale.com/a/dtd/AEC-Raw-voting-data/42018-26233 https://datagovau.ideascale.com/a/dtd/AEC-Raw-voting-data/42...
- pwc 12y agoYou can download the 2013 Senate below-the-line preferences from here: http://results.aec.gov.au/17496/Website/SenateDownloadsMenu-17496-csv.htm http://results.aec.gov.au/17496/Website/SenateDownloadsMenu-... (Down the bottom, under “State Below the Line Preferences”) I think those files, plus the above-the-line preferences should be enough to re-do the AEC's calculation... I would be interested to know if anyone had ever tried that.
- Maxious 12y agohttp://blog.angrygoats.net/2014/01/25/counting-the-west-australian-senate-election/ http://blog.angrygoats.net/2014/01/25/counting-the-west-aust... uses those files I think and is cited in the FOI review as an example of how someone could reproduce their "trade-secret" algorithm using publically available information.