| Author |
Message |
    
akl
Citizen
Username: Akl
Post Number: 109
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 9:41 pm: | 
|
Tallying up the votes on the new machines should have been a snap. |
ken (the other one)
Citizen
Username: Ken
Post Number: 405
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 9:52 pm: |
|
except that the power went out.... |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 9748
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 9:59 pm: |
|
'tis true |
Elgato
Citizen
Username: Elgato
Post Number: 63
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 10:10 pm: |
|
Funny it went out today of all days.... |
John Caffrey
Citizen
Username: Jerseyjack
Post Number: 289
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 10:23 pm: |
|
California results should be coming in approx. 11:15 |
shestheone
Citizen
Username: Shestheone
Post Number: 291
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 10:30 pm: |
|
This might be a funny question but I truly don't know the answer...does the power going out effect the machines? What is their power source?
I wish there had been a paper receipt, like an ATM receipt. |
Dogbert
Citizen
Username: Dogbert
Post Number: 109
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 10:34 pm: |
|
I hope everyone realizes that if the power went out last year we wouldn't be able to vote either because there would be no light.
And I'm sure all votes are written to persistant storage as soon as they are cast. |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 1475
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 10:45 pm: |
|
The Sequoia Advantage uses BATTERIES.
shestheone : No state in the Union has receipts ----- 26 states have passed Verified Voter paper ballot laws, which allow for the voter to see,,, thru a window the paper, and if the voter verifies it.... its cut, and dropped into a sealed box.
------------------------
With more than a third of the precincts reporting, Kean led by 75 percent to 25 percent.
Menendez, meanwhile, had 85 percent in the Democratic primary to 15 percent for James D. Kelly Jr..
frpm:
http://www.cqpolitics.com/2006/06/nj_senate_early_returns_hand_h.html
--------------------------
|
Dogbert
Citizen
Username: Dogbert
Post Number: 111
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 10:50 pm: |
|
It doesn't matter if the machine uses batteries if the room is dark. This isn't a criticism of electronic voting, the old machines and any other method have the same problem. |
John
Citizen
Username: Jdm
Post Number: 62
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 10:51 pm: |
|
shestheone,
Yes, there should be a printed user-verifiable receipt that the voting place keeps for re-counts. |
Larry Seltzer
Citizen
Username: Elvis
Post Number: 16
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 10:56 pm: |
|
John,
So what's to stop someone from stuffing the ballot box? |
Just The Aunt
Supporter
Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 5309
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 11:02 pm: |
|
Primary 2006: Maplewood committee
The power of incumbency prevailed - barely - as the allies of Maplewood Mayor Fred Profeta held on to their seats in a Democratic primary characterized as a power struggle between two opposing party factions.
“I’d chauk it up to some very, very hard work,” said incumbent Ken Pettis, the top vote-getter who won the Democratic nomination with runningmate Kathleen Leventhal for two three-year township committee terms.
Nancy Adams, who teamed with challenger Lester Lewis-Powder in her first run for elective office, came within about 28 votes of unseating Leventhal in a campaign she said focused on maintaining the community’s character in the face of development.
“As a novice, I never thought it would be as close as it was,” Adams said. “With (being) 28 votes from a 2 1/2 year incumbent with the Essex County machine behind her, it was actually reaffirming.”
They willl face Republican Bartholomew Albini in the November general election.
Contributed by Phil Read
|
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3403
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - 11:57 pm: |
|
Meanwhile, Blackwell is still very much up to his old tricks in Ohio.
If we ever decide to start locking criminals in stocks in the center of a town, Blackwell should be one of the firrst. I would take a day off to drive to Ohio for the purpose of pegging him with a few rotten eggs. You can't get more anti-American than he is. |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 1480
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 12:16 am: |
|
John, its not a receipt, IIRC that would violate Fed statute ...the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The voter doesnt keep it, S29 NJ VVPB law refers to a Voter Verified Paper ballot. This law goes into effect in 2008. The Voter doesnt even touch the paper, in any way.
Larry -- , NO one can touch the VVPB system, its closed.
DEM Essex Freeholders voted Nov 10th to buy the Sequoia Advantage DRE or voting machine, it does not have a VVPB Printer available for it. There is currently a suit in NJ, concerning that lack of Printer. If Sequoia cant provide a printer.... all 700 NEW voting machines that were delivered over the last 2 months.... may be thrown out and the county will have to buy new equipment, to the tune of 25 to 30 million. |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 1482
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 12:24 am: |
|
Here ya go...
 |
John
Citizen
Username: Jdm
Post Number: 63
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 1:34 am: |
|
FOJ, you're right and I shouldn't have called them receipts (though I did indicate that voters didn't keep them).
Larry, it would be the same as old machines that created a paper ballot. The difference is that the old machines had easily checked mechanics, while the new ones use software and computer memory, both of which are subject to hacking. |
Larry Seltzer
Citizen
Username: Elvis
Post Number: 17
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 6:36 am: |
|
The point about ballot stuffing obviously doesn't apply to the current machines which don't have a printer. I was challenging the value of the paper receipt because it is still vulnerable to far simpler attacks, i.e. ballot stuffing.
Proponents of paper receipt printers are willing to assume that election officials will engage in awkward, time-consuming behavior to hack the electronic parts of the machine, but in every scenario I've ever seen for them those same officials are entrusted with managing the paper receipts which actually rule the election results. |
John
Citizen
Username: Jdm
Post Number: 64
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 9:11 am: |
|
Larry,
There are a bunch of ways to skew an electronic vote, some of which mimic the ways paper-only votes can be. E.g.:
1. The computer records a vote different from the one that was cast.
2. The computer gives a false total vote count (like stuffing the ballot box)
3. The votes are changed after being cast
And this doesn't have to be the officials who do it. In fact, the scenarios I've seen usually assume that it isn't the officials.
Stuffing the ballot box with paper may be a simpler process that more people can perform, but it isn't necessarily easier to do.
Consider our votes yesterday. How does anyone know that the computer recorded their vote correctly? Or that their vote was counted in the end? To some degree we trust the officials, as always, but how do they trust the computers? |
Larry Seltzer
Citizen
Username: Elvis
Post Number: 18
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 9:29 am: |
|
How does anyone know the totals from other methods are accurate? How would you know the total with a paper audit trail would be accurate? That's my point. I'm not so much defending electronics as being skeptical about the value of a paper audit trail. |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1420
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 9:45 am: |
|
Larry there can be machine tampering from the non electronic methods but in these cases it has been easy to see where the tampering was and who did the tampering so the instances of tampering were few. The risk/rewards for trying this pre-electionic were not high enough.
Now with electronic voting the numbers can be changed with no audit trail. The culprit who changed them remains anonymous - even if fraud is detected. Since there is no paper trail there can not even be a manual recount that confirms the results.
The issue is one of scale. Previously if there was say ballot stuffing at one or two precincts you would have a small chance of changing the outcome of an election, but a large chance that the fraud might be discovered. With electronic fraud you have a certainty that the election results will change to the way you want them and practicly no chance of the culprit being discovered. The door is wide open on a major scale. |
Larry Seltzer
Citizen
Username: Elvis
Post Number: 20
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 9:50 am: |
|
As I've been trying to point out here you're presuming that the paper trail is invulnerable, but obviously it isn't.
>>...there can be machine tampering from the non electronic methods but in these cases it has been easy to see where the tampering was and who did the tampering so the instances of tampering were few. The risk/rewards for trying this pre-electionic were not high enough.
This is an interesting assertion. Do you actually have any basis for it? |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1421
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 9:54 am: |
|
Larry - there is plenty of circumstantial evidence and there is plenty of actual evidence of the methods that can be used to hack an election result.
Start here, at black box voting . org
|
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 1484
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 11:58 pm: |
|
Larry, there is obviously much you dont know. Let me give you a hand.
The point about ballot stuffing obviously doesn't apply to the current machines which don't have a printer.
The Sequoia Advantage does have a printer, Superintendent of Elections Carmine Casciano can verify this for you.
Proponents of paper receipt printers are willing to assume that election officials will engage in awkward, time-consuming behavior to hack the electronic parts of the machine
Another complete and utter falsehood. I suggest you google Harry Hursti and DR Shamos, they have hacked these voting machines. For Further reference go to notabnlesoftware.com, DR Mercuri's in Princton NJ, she served on the Congressional Panel that looked into the 2000 election. I have a video that shows a hack can be done in under 60 seconds, by one person, its from CNN, I guess you missed that show.
but in every scenario I've ever seen for them those same officials are entrusted with managing the paper receipts which actually rule the election results.
Again, wrong. Please cite from NJ election Law, title 19, or shut up.
How does anyone know the totals from other methods are accurate?
Actually statistical studies have looked at this for decades. Paper ballots scanned by Optical scanners are considered to be the most accurate, with an average undervote rate of 1%, Next, lever machines at 1.5%, next Punch cards @ 2%.
Push button DREs such as the Sequoia Advanatge and the Unilect DRE, have undervote rates as high as 18%, According to a study done by a state Election ofiical from PA. The Unlect DRE had an undervote rate of 5 to 8%. Its on page 6 of DR Shamos's report... google it.
How would you know the total with a paper audit trail would be accurate?
DOH, thats why its called a Voter Verified Paper Ballot. The Voter Verifies it, by LOOKING AT THE PAPER BALLOT.
How stupid do you think people are? That you cant articulate accuratly the system, the law, the legal terms, I really dont think anyone could possibly take what yoiu have posted seriously
That's my point. I'm not so much defending electronics as being skeptical about the value of a paper audit trail.
If you could show some knowledge about the topic, you might actually understand the topic. Instead what you have demonstrated is a need to sound important, without the ability to post anything important.
I suggest you go to NJ.com or google, do a search with my name:
Roger Fox
And Sequoia Advanatge.
The Star Ledger has interviewed me several times on this topic and when Codey signed S29, the Voter Verified Paper Ballot law. And if that doesnt satisfy you, ask Fred Profetta who I am.
Oh yeah, the Sequoia Advantage stands 54 inches high, in the tilted back position, so if you put it on a table, as you suggested, say a 30 inch table, the "a" line will be 84 inches high, how do you suggest reaching the top row to vote?
If you place the Ballot face in the vertical position, its even higher, 58 inches. The Entire machine is one piece. Here is a pic I have annotated with the measurements, in inches.
 |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1435
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 10:22 am: |
|
When you close those curtains the board is very dark with only that middle overhead light to show the writing. My eyes are not the best but not the worst and I had trouble reading the board.
There was no chair for me to sit in (I assume the pictured man is in a wheel chair) and it does appear to be made for sitting down to post your votes. Standing up and trying to do this for an average sized man like the man standing behind the wheelchair makes for a cramped back.
I rushed through my selections in order to relieve the pain I felt from huching over.
These machines are poorly designed. |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 9791
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 10:27 am: |
|
I think you're misreading Larry's tone and questions. No need to be so rude.
Larry is a technology journalist, by the way. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3337
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 12:51 pm: |
|
Foj, you might want to google "Larry Seltzer" before you comment on his "need to sound important, without the ability to post anything important." |
S.L.K.s. Ghost
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1636
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 1:26 pm: |
|
Hoops-
What do you want, the machine to give you a/c, martini and a BJ too? You should know who you are voting way before even entering the booth.
In other words, in and out...
Geez...
-SLK |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1438
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 1:37 pm: |
|
Geez indeed. While it may take a bit longer to vote in the booth that you would like designed, I would be happy if it was as simple andeasy to use and as the old machines.
It doesnt make any sense to give us a 'new and improved' model if it is not as good as the old one. |
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 6492
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 6:48 pm: |
|
FOJ...while you are quite knowledgeable about the systems in place a PL to Larry to apologize might be in order. As Dave said, I think you completely misinterpreted his tone. |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 1486
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 8, 2006 - 11:16 pm: |
|
Duncan & all. Possibly. I was hoping Larry would have something to say.
Dave, a "technology journalist" ? OK.
Rastro, advice taken, I googled Larry.
Sorry Larry if I came down too hard on ya, But from my standpoint you got some very basic issues backwards. You may see even agree with me after getting up to speed.
SO Larry, do think that its good from a security standpoint, that the Sequoia Advantage uses a z- 80 chip, with Firmware, vs an OS and say a more modern 386? Remembering the ballot definition files are loaded via a PCMCIA card, and that portable media has been the proven attack vector in various hacks of both Optical scanners and DRE voting machines.
Or is it just as easy to load new instruction thru the PCM card, irregardless of the chip and OS or Firmware. |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 9814
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Friday, June 9, 2006 - 12:00 am: |
|
I am trying to follow along and am getting lost. In one post you say
Quote:DEM Essex Freeholders voted Nov 10th to buy the Sequoia Advantage DRE or voting machine, it does not have a VVPB Printer available for it. There is currently a suit in NJ, concerning that lack of Printer.
Then in your response to Larry, you note
Quote: The Sequoia Advantage does have a printer, Superintendent of Elections Carmine Casciano can verify this for you.
Which is it or is there something I'm reading past? |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 1490
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 9, 2006 - 9:22 am: |
|
I should have been more concise..sorry . this printer is for the end of voting tally..........just like the AVM Printmatic lever voting machine.
These tallys are used by election ofiicals to compile the different races...after voting is over.
VS.
A VVPB printer. Voter Verified Paper Ballot Printer. This is a printer that prints out your selections, each voter must view the paper thru a window, & verify that that is who they wanted to vote for and then press the final button........ that individual paper ballot is then Cut from the roll of paper and it is dropped to the bottom of the box, attached to the VVPB printer.
If what you read thru the window, is not correct... you press a button that marks the paper ballot as void. ANd you then go thru the entire process again.
The purpose of the CUT & DROP is to shuffle, or randomize the paper ballots. If the paper ballots were kept in order, somebody.... could figure out.. whos voting for who. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page