2004-11-03 19:46:12 UTC
time, the summary screen ended up saying Bush each time she changed her vote
makes me wonder:
Why doesn't the screen IMMEDIATELY tell you who it detected that you voted
for, rather than waiting until after you have voted for everyone? Or maybe
some machines do, and some machines don't?
And why should the manufacturer create a system that can make mistakes like
that when the screen gets dirty, or require that a pencil be used instead of
I look forward to the day that all voting machines have paper backup,
because I am enough of a programmer to know how easy it is to divert some of
the votes by storing a different vote a certain fraction of the time.
(Remember the programmers years ago who manipulated bank computers to
transfer a fraction of a cent (the fraction part of interest earned) from
every account every quarter, and weren't caught for years because management
didn't suspect a thing?
I am going to wonder, for ages, if the touch screen industry is somehow
involved in this victory.
My ideal scenario for our government is one in which one party can't get
everything that they want. I belive that we have made our best progress when
the President is a different party from either the house and/or the senate.
Right now, we're looking at a government that is overwhelmingly Republican,
House, Senate, White House, and Supreme Court.
Now, we're looking at the possibility that the Supreme Court might become so
lopsided that only one point of view will ever come through again?