Diebold Problems Slow Election Results In Alaska

from the sure,-you-can-trust-those-machines... dept

With the ridiculous number of voting machine flaws that have been reported concerning Diebold e-voting machines, you’d think the company would be careful to make sure the most basic things, such as being able to have the machines send in its results, would work properly. Apparently not. Up in Alaska, the results from a recent election were slowed after numerous Diebold machines failed to actually report the results of the election. Election officials needed to “manually upload” the results from the machines. If the machines can fail on something as basic as that, is it any wonder that so many of us ask why there aren’t backup systems in these machines for the purpose of a recount?

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Diebold Problems Slow Election Results In Alaska”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Junyo (user link) says:

“…the machines’ modems either did not get a dial tone or had other problems.”

Diabolical. Diebold is apparently not only responsible for making crappy voting machines, but also for the quality and servicablity of third party modems and the POTS network.

Shit fails. They at least provided for a backup solution, i.e. the ability to manually force a connection.

Mike (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Shit fails. They at least provided for a backup solution, i.e. the ability to manually force a connection.

Uh, right, that’s the point. For *this* they have a backup. Why don’t they have a backup for counting votes? The point is shit does fail. If you’re building voting machines you want to make damn sure that you have backup for everything that might fail.

Mike (profile) says:

Re: Re:

And wasn’t this the election where the imcumbent Republican govenor was dumped? Man that Diebold is a crafty!

I’m assuming you’re talking about the conspiracy theories that Diebold supports Republicans. However, we have NEVER focused on that aspect of it. The point isn’t about partisan issues, but about accurate and fair voting for whoever the people want.

Secondly, the point of this post was not, in any way, to suggest that this was a planned breakage by Diebold for some master plan. We’ve never made that claim about any of Diebold’s actions. The point, as in all of our posts about e-voting, is to note that these things break, and they should be held to higher standards for the sake of democracy.

It shows an interesting bias on your part that you immediately jump to a partisan conclusion.

The Truth Beacon says:

Since none of you know...

Even in Anchorage, the reliability of non-hardwired WANs has much to be desired. Having a second home up there and spending a good portion of my year in Wasilla, I can tell you that it would surprise me if anything more than hard-paper voting would work successfully. The Diebold’s success up there also assuredly would not sway the election by enough to boot Stevens even if half of the machines didn’t even record their votes. You have complete ignorance in this subject and therefore your input is completely moot. Get off your soap box already and realize that how things are in the Bay Area are so far from reality that if there were an indigenous people on Pluto they would be closer in touch with Earth reality.

MartinE says:

You might consider the fact that the CEO of Diebold, a major Bush supporter, bragged that he would personally ‘deliver’ the state of Ohio for Bush in 2000. The Diebold/Republican ‘conspiracy theorists’ have legit reasons to be suspicious.

These machines have been hacked numerous times with multiple failures in tests done in states all over the country.

Junyo (user link) says:

“The point is shit does fail. If you’re building voting machines you want to make damn sure that you have backup for everything that might fail.”

Yeah, I got that. I got it the first couple dozen times I heard the story, and variations thereof. But if you’re trying to illustrate that point with this story then you’re doing a piss pure job of it. How about “Compliments to Diebold on having the foresight to include redundancy for connectivity issues. Too bad they don’t see the need to do that for actual vote counting issues.” See? If you make your point without mischaracterization, you don’t catch flack from people that aren’t partisan hacks or, you know, read. as it is, you’re reporting a nonissue as if it’s part of some master plan. ‘Course, that feeds the target demo, so I guess it’s easier. I digress.

Anonymous Coward says:

Two questions here.

First, why the hell do they need electronic voting in Alaska? Can’t they just shout out the window and listen to the responses?

As for the people on Pluto being “closer”, face it, Pluto is not a planet. Can’t live on a place that isn’t even a planet. Now I just have to track down the peole who sail the 5th ocean.

Mike, I think maybe sometimes you jump on posters when they make comments, most of the time they may not be taking issue with you or your views, but other posters here.

Cynical Bastard says:

Straight outa the managerial handbook

Come on you guys! I’m very suprised. You know this is from Section A1920 part 1643.765 of the Mysterious Managerial Handbook that I know exist’s somewhere.

It states and I quote “When releasing new product or service apply the BASS ACKWARDS philosiphy to which this is our credo. Use technology that is outdated & is destined to fail from the getgo. This will in turn make us managers look like we have something to do managerial.

Especially when working with the government which is who taught us this philosiphy. Never accept any responsability & always always point the finger at someone else.”

zeroJJ says:

hackability = plausible deniability… i.e, “hey, we didn’t tamper with the vote counts, it was some.. uh, Asian hackers… or something….”

Also, just too many questions surrounding the actual cause of the failure to jump to conclusions Mike…

“Wilson says the machines’ modems either did not get a dial tone or had other problems.”

Did the modems fail to get a dialtone on a line that had a verifiable dialtone with an analog phone? Were the lines tested to ensure that they can call the votes in.

Were there dialing issues (outside lines, prefixes, toll restrictions, etc)

More importantly, is the voting machine SMART enough to test the line and connectivity to the upload server PRIOR to voting window. I.e., if the machine can’t verify a connection at the start of the voting day, it is taken offline or deemed unsuable?

There is a WIDE swath of possibilities there with the “other problems”.. Of course, it could be 100% “other problems” which all reside in the voting machine…

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...