After All That, E-Voting Experts Suggest Voting Machines May Have Been Hacked For Trump

from the just...-no dept

In this topsy-turvy world where nothing makes any sense at all any more, Donald Trump spent months and months spinning stories about how the election was "rigged" and e-voting machines were going to be hacked in favor of Hillary Clinton. While we've spent nearly two decades pointing out problems with e-voting machines, and urged governments to do away with them, it still seemed unlikely that a hack would be sustainable on a large scale -- in part because our election system is such a mess and is handled differently from state to state. And, as Ed Snowden himself pointed out, hiding such a hack would be quite difficult. But with Trump refusing to say if he would concede, and talking up how the vote would be rigged, combined with false stories that made the rounds incorrectly claiming that George Soros owned a company that was making millions of e-voting machines, it seemed like a recipe for disaster if Trump lost and his supporters started insisting that the voting machines were hacked.

But, of course, everything is upside down this year. Trump won... and now suddenly some Clinton supporters are arguing that e-voting machines may have been hacked. Now, to be clear, I wouldn't even bring up this story at all under most circumstances. Even as I don't trust e-voting machines, stories of actual hacked elections tend to be the kind of thing that conspiracy theory kooks pass around, rather than anything substantiated in any real way. What's giving some people pause this time around, is that one of the people claiming that the votes in some states may have been hacked is J. Alex Halderman.

Halderman is legit. He's basically the guy who studies how hackable e-voting machines are. We've been writing about Halderman since he was just a Princeton student, and hacking DRM systems. But he's been hacking e-voting machines for almost as long. And he's really, really good at it. Remember the story of the e-voting machine that was reprogrammed to play Pac-Man? That was Alex Halderman.

That said... this story still seems unlikely. The NY Mag story on it is woefully lacking in detail:
The academics presented findings showing that in Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots. Based on this statistical analysis, Clinton may have been denied as many as 30,000 votes; she lost Wisconsin by 27,000. While it’s important to note the group has not found proof of hacking or manipulation, they are arguing to the campaign that the suspicious pattern merits an independent review — especially in light of the fact that the Obama White House has accused the Russian government of hacking the Democratic National Committee.
But... it's not clear this holds up under much scrutiny. Perhaps Halderman and voting rights expert John Bonifaz have more details on what they found, but as Nate Silver noted, a more rigorous statistical look at the data -- controlling for education and race -- seems to make the statistical anomaly disappear.
A big claim of actual vote rigging via e-voting machines would need a tremendous amount of evidence to be believable, no matter who won. So far, it doesn't seem like there's enough proof here, even if someone as respected as Halderman is involved in making these claims. But the fact that he is involved at least makes it worthy of further scrutiny.

But... either way, can we please finally get people to realize that e-voting machines without a verifiable paper trail are a disaster and should have no place in any election system? We'd all be better off if there wasn't even a question of hacked voter machines.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    cliff, 23 Nov 2016 @ 3:29am

    Mandatory Computerphile

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    TechnoMage (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 4:07am

    If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

    I hate to sound like a 'truther' conspiracy theorist... but I have my masters in CS focusing on Hybrid & Embedded systems...

    And I can pretty much guarantee that if someone with enough money and motivation wanted to... they could steal an election on the state level. Several states (PA is one of them IIRC, I know TN is one too but it matters less for this election since it isn't a 'swing state' ) to this day have e-voting machines that have -0- paper trail, and so once you vote... you have no idea what bits are being flipped inside the machine...

    XKCD got this right years and years ago... if your voting machine needs to run anti-virus... that is like your kindergarten teacher telling you he always wears a condom while teaching... "sure... its 'additional safety'... but he should NEVER EVER NEED IT"... https://xkcd.com/463/

    2004 Ohio had voting 'irregularities' existed where the DEEPEST BLUE areas voted for the most liberal judge in living memory... and Bush on the same ballots... Hell, 2 voting officials went to jail in Cleveland for 'mishandling of voting material' or w/e the 'exact' charge was https://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/25/294599/-

    But in ohio that year... none or almost none of the voting machines had paper trails.. (I know because I was the head elections official for my local precinct on election day)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_election_voting_controversies



    Everyone (except those who are: 1) paid to think otherwise, 2) job requires them to not think so) 'knows' this is a possibility/threat to Democracy... but when one political party gains an advantage from anything that suppresses voter turnout, and screams all the time about "Voter Fraud" ... Any talk bringing up Voting machines and "Election Fraud"(completely different than voter fraud, and much more dangerous) becomes politically tainted...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Mason Wheeler (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 4:52am

      Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

      It looks like you're trying to make some good, legitimate points, but be careful who you cite. Unfortunately, your credibility goes right out the window when you link to a site like the Daily Kos, an extremist site dedicated to raving irrational hatred of all things even the slightest bit conservative. They're basically the Left's answer to Breitbart.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 5:04am

        Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

        " They're basically the Left's answer to Breitbart."

        Not a very good answer is it?
        I mean Breitbart out does most everyone in the slimy propaganda departmental.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 5:12am

        Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

        Having read both DailyKos and Breitbart: no, they're not equivalent. Breitbart is a white supremacist neo-Nazi site that promotes hatred of people: black people, brown people, women, Muslim people, Jewish people, etc. DailyKos is a liberal site that doesn't promote hatred of people. (In fact, those who attempt to promote hatred of people on there find themselves smacked down by its operators.)

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:21am

          Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

          You sound exactly like one of the folks that lost this election.

          Everyone not on your side is a "white supremacist neo-Nazi site that promotes hatred of people: black people, brown people, women, Muslim people, Jewish people, etc."

          Not sure if you noticed but a lot of people are getting tired of the default rant of the left. NO Substance, just specious derogatory claims.

          Last I checked your side equally hates certain groups and advocates for their murder, its been in the news lately, maybe you have read about it.

          So get a clue and stop running around spewing garbage, some people are just exactly what you say that are, but you will find them right there next to you as well and they will not be going away!

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:30am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

            "Everyone not on your side is a"

            Obviously false claim, oh well - maybe no one will notice.
            Spewing garbage is the GOP SOP; deflect, project, reject.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 7:25am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

              "Spewing garbage is the GOP SOP; deflect, project, reject."

              Just the GOP eh? I understand bias, but it will not get you very far to remain ignorant either. The GOP is hardly the only group or political class doing this. I can certainly see that it comes from the left far more often.

              I do not belong to a left, right, dem, or rep class. I am about as centrist as they come according to political tests.

              The polarization that has been wrought by the two parties in this country is tearing the nation down, just as George Washington said it would. It helped to create the Civil War, and now the general left in the country would like to see civil war again or at lease division. Calls for murder, Secession, and outright bigotry against the side they call bigots.

              The only thing Americans have succeeded in accomplishing is the destruction of their own house. The AC made it clear which side he was on, and made it clear that he had a side. I was addressing that, and low did the kooks come out of the woodwork in the bigots defense!

              You guys have made it clear you can easily be turned against one another, I invite you to take a step back and reconsider a few things!

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 7:59am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                I can certainly see that it comes from the left far more often.

                Yes - of course! That's the side with the backing of the KKK, those waving their confederate flags, the ones who like to encourage discrimination against the LBGT community in the name of "religious freedom," and the ones saying that black lives don't matter.

                But yeah...tell me again how we're promoting division.

                Your definition of centrist is really really fucked up.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 8:12am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                  "But yeah...tell me again how we're promoting division."

                  Just keep reading your own words... I think that does it just fine. You have chosen to judge an entire spectrum of people just because there are a few clown in their ranks.

                  Here is a little secret you might not have figured out in life. Everyone has a few idiots in their bunches. If your Magnum Opus is to cast aspersion on the masses for the sins of the few then you are the one causing the division.

                  I think Jon Steward hit the nail on the head for people with your mindset.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 8:21am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                    I can certainly see that it comes from the left far more often. (YOUR words)

                    You have chosen to judge an entire spectrum of people just because there are a few clown in their ranks.

                    Yeah, just get off your high horse and site down, junior.

                    You'd be better off re-reading your own shit.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 10:21am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                Claim = "GOP SOP; deflect, project, reject"

                "Just from GOP?" = deflect

                "I can certainly see that it comes from the left far more often." = project

                "I am about as centrist as they come according to political tests." = reject

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 10:32am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                  Not sure what you getting at here?

                  Do you have anything of substance to add or are you just frustrated?

                  I reject your reality and substitute my own?

                  The deflection is pointing out hypocrisy, but I can understand why you wouldn't like that.

                  The projecting is clearly just my observation, which means all observations are projections by your definition. This means you probably need to stop talking with people entirely because the only thing you would be capable of is projecting and you seem to not like that so up... stop projecting yourself there big man!

                  The thing you claim as rejecting... that was just information, take it or leave it. You clearly have access to the internet so you should consider looking up a few definitions, you are sorely in need!

                  It's been fun Mr. Troll!

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 11:51am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                    Hahahahahahaha, you suck at this.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Hero, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:31am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

            I recommend that you stop thinking of the nation in terms of "sides".

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 7:10am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

              I don't, but the AC I was addressing made it clear that he does. Do you grok that? Methinks not!

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 9:31am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                "I recommend that you stop thinking of the nation in terms of "sides"."

                "I don't, but the AC I was addressing made it clear that he does. Do you grok that? Methinks not!"

                ...yett you play into it none the less...

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 9:31am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                "I recommend that you stop thinking of the nation in terms of "sides"."

                "I don't, but the AC I was addressing made it clear that he does. Do you grok that? Methinks not!"

                ...yett you play into it none the less...

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 9:31am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                "I recommend that you stop thinking of the nation in terms of "sides"."

                "I don't, but the AC I was addressing made it clear that he does. Do you grok that? Methinks not!"

                ...yet you play into it none the less...

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 10:09am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                  I know you are wanting to troll, but could you make it less obvious?

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Groaker (profile), 25 Nov 2016 @ 7:33am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

              Thank you for your rational comment.

              May I also add that applies to State, Municipal and local elections as well.

              It is probably a reasonable assumption that most who read and comment on Techdirt are above average in education, intelligence and perception of the world around them.

              This scares the hell out of me.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            PaulT (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:41am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

            "Everyone not on your side"

            Problem number one with US politics is this attitude - everyone has to be on a "side", there's only two possible "sides" and criticism of something means you have to be on the opposing "side".

            While the first AC's comments were inflammatory (although not entirely false), but rather than try to defend them with a reasonable response, you just try to attack the other "side". Thus, nothing is resolved and nobody ever finds common ground, as with every political debate in recent times. It's pretty sad to behold from the sidelines.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 7:08am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

              You are very hypocritical.

              "Problem number one with US politics is this attitude - everyone has to be on a "side", there's only two possible "sides" and criticism of something means you have to be on the opposing "side"."

              I agree with this statement and it is absolutely not my fault in the least when he clearly places himself in that setting. It hardly places me there when my post was addressing that problem of his. You need to seriously consider your own advice, because you just made it clear you have the exact same problem as the AC I was responding too.

              "While the first AC's comments were inflammatory (although not entirely false), but rather than try to defend them with a reasonable response, you just try to attack the other "side"."

              Seriously? You are attacking someone that addressed someone elses obvious bigotry? I already agreed that he was correct and that some people are like that, I am just stating that he is surrounded by the same on his own side as well and you helped prove my point.

              You have essentially proven everything I said in an attempt to defend the bigot. Brilliant!

              You guys need some clarity in a very bad way! You complain about the sides that exist yet you make it clear that you have chosen a side. The word for this is hypocrisy.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                PaulT (profile), 24 Nov 2016 @ 4:22am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                "You are very hypocritical."

                How so? None of your following points address this.

                "You are attacking someone that addressed someone elses obvious bigotry?"

                How is he a bigot? He attacked a "news" publication's biases. that's not bigotry, perhaps you need a dictionary?

                "You guys need some clarity in a very bad way"

                Which "guys"? I'm stating a personal opinion. Which team are you falsely placing me among?

                You prove my point. You're treating this as a team game, and this prevents you from considering the actual words and opinions of the people you're attacking.

                "You complain about the sides that exist yet you make it clear that you have chosen a side"

                You're hallucinating.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              art guerrilla (profile), 24 Nov 2016 @ 6:23am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

              spot on, paul...
              focusing on 'sides' and baring our stunted sheeple fangs at each other is EXACTLY what the monty burns of the world want...
              The They stroke their white persian cats, lave their chitinous claws, and cackle eee-vil laughs that aren't funny, when their puppetmastering of pitting us against each other works exactly as planned...
              it is not: My Infallible Side/Brand vs Your Incorrect Side/Brand; it is: Bottom vs Top, 99% vs 1%, krony kapitalism vs free markets, Empire vs rule of law, freedom vs oppression...
              *those* are the 'sides'...

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 7:19am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

            "Everyone not on your side is a "white supremacist neo-Nazi site that promotes hatred of people: black people, brown people, women, Muslim people, Jewish people, etc."

            I know that it's difficult for inferior people like you to read and comprehend, but that's not what I said.

            I said that Breitbart does that. And they do. This is not open to debate or question.

            I also did not say which (of many) "sides" that I'm on, so your speculation is completely misguided.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 8:32am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

              "I also did not say which (of many) "sides" that I'm on, so your speculation is completely misguided."

              Feel free to let us know which side you stand on then?

              I stand on the side of we are all Americans first, and it will not do us any good to let the party or political biases turn us into enemies. No will ever agree with each other 100%, but there are certain things that a nation will never survive and divisions like this is one of them. It may not happen in our life times, but America will fall. No group of people experience peace like this and live long because humans cannot refuse strife and angst. Like a self destructive teenager, people really cannot get over themselves. Conflict stalks its prey and the prey love it!

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Wendy Cockcroft, 24 Nov 2016 @ 7:29am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

            America doesn't really have a left, by which I mean "state runs all the things, private property abolished, wealth redistributed."

            What it does have is some noisy radical progressives and an assortment of liberals who caucus with them, which is what are being called "the left" along with anyone who disagrees with you. Now go and do a search on Breitbart.com and any of the groups identified as targets above. It's not hard to find some very nasty stuff in there. The Daily Kos is certainly biased but I wouldn't say it's radical.

            At the moment they're bashing Trump but I'm not seeing anything particularly radical in there. I don't tend to read the Daily Kos because of its bias.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 27 Nov 2016 @ 3:13pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

            Don't forget, Breitbart has Jewish writers. Kind of destroys the neo-Nazi claims. What I learned from this election cycle is, if the left says it, it is probably a lie.

            Also, the Communist Party in the US supported Hillary. Communism has killed over 100 million people. But you won't hear the lamestream media or the left talk about that.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              PaulT (profile), 28 Nov 2016 @ 12:12am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

              "Don't forget, Breitbart has Jewish writers. Kind of destroys the neo-Nazi claims."

              Not really. Jews worked for the actual Nazis at one point too, until things went too far wrong for them, of course.
              Having a token or two to distract might work for the simple-minded, but if you look at the overall picture it's far less flattering.

              "What I learned from this election cycle is, if the left says it, it is probably a lie"

              Who did you learn that from? What about the many truthful things they say, do you reject those because you dislike the source too? What about the many demonstrable lies on the "right" - do those get a pass because you agree with them?

              "Also, the Communist Party in the US supported Hillary"

              Citation needed. Also, even if true, neo-Nazis and the KKK have openly supported Trump, among other despicable groups of human beings. Does that mean that he's also culpable for the atrocities committed by those organisations? If not, why do you apply things that happened decades ago in other continents to Clinton?

              Idiots who split the entire discussion between "left" and "right" and insist on applying the ,most ridiculous reductio ad absurdum to the other "team" are what's destroying your political system and removing any intelligent debate.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Mason Wheeler (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 11:48am

          Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

          DailyKos is a liberal site that doesn't promote hatred of people.

          If you think this, then you are not paying attention. They blatantly promote hatred of all things conservative, often in so many words. There's been more than one article on there that literally used the word "hate" in the context of how any right-minded reader should feel about the subject of the current excoriation. Some of them were written by Markos, the guy who runs the site.

          The only difference between them and Breitbart is who they're inciting hatred against. Both are ugly, festering menaces that are destroying our culture, rotting it away from the inside.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Wendy Cockcroft, 24 Nov 2016 @ 7:30am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

            Could you dig up a couple of links, please?

            I'm not sure that promoting partisanship is healthy. We shouldn't give anyone a pass for behaving badly.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 24 Nov 2016 @ 7:27pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

              Why not look yourself? It is faster, and allows better determination of the validity of the site.

              BlackBoxVoting.org

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                PaulT (profile), 25 Nov 2016 @ 12:31am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                "Why not look yourself?"

                There's an honest method of debate in this kind of public forum - making a claim and providing a reasonable source of evidence that can be examined and debated/refuted. Then, there's a dishonest form of debate - demanding that everyone reading your claim do their own research, usually followed by rejecting any further cited source as invalid and/or claiming that the person still questioning your claims simply didn't do their research properly.

                In this case, the person stating that a site "blatantly promote(s) hatred of all things conservative, often in so many words" is the one who should provide a citation of them doing that. If they're honest, they provide such a link. if they're dishonest, they simply claim that the person disagreeing with them hasn't been looking at the "right" pages on that site.

                Seasoned debaters are familiar with the signs of dishonest debate, but a reasonable person will give a suspected timewaster a chance to cite their own claims before rejecting them.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • icon
                  Groaker (profile), 25 Nov 2016 @ 7:25am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                  Just in case you haven't noticed, this is not a debate. Further, in debates, refutation is the primary mechanism for winning.

                  I am not interested in a debate, but rather trying to provide information. To provide a single court decision, or a single quote is meaningless on the net. It is the closest we have come to the "million monkeys" meme.

                  Perhaps I have an advantage in that I was not taught things so much, as how to find things. With the net you have the ability to look up a practically unending stream of information. Further one has the ability to follow threads of interest that lead to information previously unknown.

                  A reference to an extremely obscure subject that is not search-able MIGHT call for a URL. for example: "When did Dr Smith remediate the error in the computation of the relaxation time of a loaded sphere?"

                  But for topics that are abundant, multiple searches are both educating and mandatory for determining truth (or as close to it as we are likely to get.)

                  Perhaps you read "some political daily," and believe every word in it. But especially for those topics that appear to suffer from prevarication, I will read not only those articles that are aligned with my political thought, but also those opposed. If appropriate I will read multiple foreign papers as well.

                  Spoon fed information is rather meaningless. Especially in this day and age when alternate views are so easily obtained.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • icon
                    PaulT (profile), 25 Nov 2016 @ 7:45am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

                    "Just in case you haven't noticed, this is not a debate."

                    Actually, it is. Also, where did you come from? Are you the anonymous coward who I responded to, an alternate for the Mason Wheeler login that Wendy replied to, or a random 3rd party who decided to dive in? You're certainly not represented in the thread you're commenting on now unless you're one of the above.

                    "I am not interested in a debate, but rather trying to provide information"

                    No information was provided above except for an uncited, unfounded assertion that's highly debatable. Mason either needs to provide the proof for his accusation or accept that people have a rather different viewpoint based on the evidence they have seen. Sorry, but I don't accept questionable assertions at face value.

                    "But for topics that are abundant, multiple searches are both educating and mandatory for determining truth"

                    Yes, and everybody searching will have come across different information and have reached differing conclusions. Hence why discussion is important.

                    "Perhaps you read "some political daily," and believe every word in it"

                    Perhaps I don't and you need to stop pulling assumptions out of your ass.

                    "Spoon fed information is rather meaningless"

                    Which is why it's important for people to honestly debate it. So, why are you so uninterested in that debate?

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:24am

        Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

        You evidently like to use logical fallacies -- attack the messenger. dailykos.com reprinted stuff from the AP about an ACTUAL trial and an ACTUAL conviction.

        What did they print that was not factual?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Paul Renault (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:35am

        Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

        I'm trying to figure out in what way a headline like "Ohio Elections Officials Convicted of Tampering with 2004 Presidential Recount" can have a left/right slant.

        Would you settle for this account?
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/24/AR2007012401441.html

        That and, as a Canadian, I get soooo tired hearing someone characterize an organization/politician/person-with-pulse as being "at the far extreme utmost radical left", when everyone else in the world finds them as being slightly to the right of center. Why to frame the Overton Window, eh.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 24 Nov 2016 @ 3:52am

          Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

          People are blinded by their world views. There are a multitude of court cases, public trials and private trials where voting machine companies could not produce a single reliable voting machine.

          As soon as people as people hear about this, they blame the party that opposes their own. It is a reflex reaction of emotional denial.

          Yet the individuals who claim to make the determinations that party X is responsible for these dastardly deeds, and those who put known (proven) voting machine failures in the class of chemtrail nuts have no idea what it takes to crack a computer. Have never cracked one. They speak from ignorance and bias of what they wish to be true.

          They are as fervent about this as are the evolutionists, the James Jones crowd, and any other group of insane fools.

          How many here are crackers or hackers? How many know even the basic rules for securing a computer, which at best are partially successful? How many believe that there are golden back doors which let in "nice" people in and keep out "bad" people? How many can't see past the dead cat on the table?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:51am

        Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

        Psst, Nate Silver got his start at DailyKos many years ago under the screen name Poblano, so DailyKos isn't complete garbage.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nate_Silver#Creation_and_motivation

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:35am

      Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

      I would not claim voting for a judge as evidence of some tampering. I do not know a single person (and many are very well informed voters) who do much more than pure surface research on judges. Most just vote them back in for another term or randomly pick the one that they are most familiar with or is top-of-mind. Heck our local regional newspaper, which always does extensive interviews with all candidates for the state and provides incredibly detailed research on each one just says "We have their bios and statements available but in reality just put all incumbent judges back in office".
      I would not be surprised if PA is the same way.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    BigNoNo, 23 Nov 2016 @ 4:08am

    JA WL HC

    So JA is captured, and WL is immobilised, the HC squad can go back to winning lost election.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    roebling (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 4:18am

    Paper ballot bias

    Paper "absentee" ballots favor Democrats because they offer the corrupt the opportunity to vote anonymously.
    Career Dems, the organization of those who want more than they've earned (i.e., trade unionists, government employees, welfare recipients), are over-represented in voting scenarios that don't require IDs.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 4:45am

      Re: Paper ballot bias

      Bullshit. They still need ID to register and ask for those absentee ballots.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      PaulT (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 5:01am

      Re: Paper ballot bias

      I'll ignore the obvious bait, your bare assertions with no evidence, your obvious bias and the alternative spin that can be stated in response (such as that voting absentee also favours people who have real jobs and responsibilities they can't sacrifice to queue for hours when they can avoid it or are informed/intelligent enough to know of those alternatives).

      I'll simply note that not a word of what you wrote has anything to do with the in-person voting machines that are the subject of the article. Make of that what you will.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 5:10am

      Re: Paper ballot bias

      You realize you just accused all of our service members over seas of being "corrupt" and wanting "more than they've earned".

      Perhaps our service members wanting adequate health care is asking too much from the captains of industry that sent them over seas to get blown up, because said captains are very busy spending their hard earned cash on new yachts, mansions and hookers to be bothered with anything the low lifes are whining about.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 10:26am

        Re: Re: Paper ballot bias

        Sounds like he has his straw deep down in a cup of tea. I guess that is his version of a party.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Wifather2000, 24 Nov 2016 @ 6:57pm

      Re: Paper ballot bias

      Did Sarah Palin write this for you?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Nov 2016 @ 7:07pm

      Re: Paper ballot bias

      um, you do realize that ALL absentee ballots, provisional ballots, early-voting ballots, are simply held in abeyance until the realtime voting ends...
      IF the number of absentee/etc ballots would change the outcome of the elections, then they are counted... IF the margin of victory in the elections is greater than the number of absentee ballots, they are thrown in the dumpster uncounted...
      based on a true story...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 4:50am

    Since it's Halderman...take it seriously

    I've been reading reports/papers/etc. on voting systems since the election debacle in 2000. Halderman has long since established himself as one of the most clueful researchers in the field and if he speaks, what he says should be taken VERY seriously.

    (So should what Silver says, although his area of expertise is statistics, not voting systems.)

    One of the things that is non-obvious to people who haven't studied voting systems, electoral procedures, demographics, and voting patterns, is that it isn't necessary to shift a lot of votes in order to change the outcome in a precinct, a county, or a state. The right changes in the right places will suffice in any close race. That still requires WAY more votes than anybody can manipulate with voter fraud -- a non-problem hyped up by those bent on vote suppression. It requires automation, and it requires detailed knowledge of local voting patterns in order to make the shift statistically difficult to detect.

    That means that the targets (for a presidential election) are in swing states and in counties/precincts that are close to 50-50 based on prior voting patterns, demographics, registration, etc. That also means small shifts: instead of 31,278 to 30,982, make it 30,781 to 31,479: same total, enough of a shift to win and just enough to get above a 1% margin and avoid a recount.

    Did it happen? Unknown. But given the consequences, and given that Halderman is pointing it at it, it should get an excruciatingly close look. And let's note that we wouldn't even BE HERE if folks had listened to him and the other experts who have been pointing out these problems for years and years. It's ridiculous that in the US in 2016 we still use electronic voting systems that are hackable in minutes by amateurs.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 5:13am

    "Since I won, we'll just pretend I never mentioned that shall we?"

    In this topsy-turvy world where nothing makes any sense at all any more, Donald Trump spent months and months spinning stories about how the election was "rigged" and e-voting machines were going to be hacked in favor of Hillary Clinton.

    One of my thoughts at the time was that making such a claim opened up a can of worms that might turn on him, which seems to have occurred. If he's going to claim that the system is rigged and the only way Hilary would win is if the machines were hacked, then it opens up the exact same suspicion when he won, as he's already arguing that the machines have been compromised.

    If a candidate wants to argue that the machines are compromised and their opponent stands to benefit, then it's trivially easy to turn that right around on them should they win instead, because once the argument has been made it works the same no matter which candidate wins.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ninja (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 5:20am

      Re: "Since I won, we'll just pretend I never mentioned that shall we?"

      Which highlights the need to make the whole electoral process fully auditable, no?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      The Wanderer (profile), 25 Nov 2016 @ 8:40am

      Re: "Since I won, we'll just pretend I never mentioned that shall we?"

      Hey, he said it clearly himself: "I will absolutely accept the results of this great and historic election, if I win.".

      For him to consider the possibility of his victory being invalid would be inconsistent with that clear statement. You wouldn't want him to go back on his word, would you?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Seachele99, 25 Nov 2016 @ 11:41am

      Re: "Since I won, we'll just pretend I never mentioned that shall we?"

      Consider this: Trump was way over the top shouting about rigged elections and he made a spectacle about not accepting the election results if they were not in his favor. He set the stage to make it highly hypocritical for the election to be questioned if it WAS in his favor. This occurred to me back when he suggested Hillary should be drug tested. Back when speculation about him being on something started to occur, he quickly diverted suspicion on to her. His accusations about Hillary were so absurd he made the idea of questioning any drug use by him a highly hypocritical proposition. If he were a sociopath, projecting his own guilt on others would be pretty typical behavior.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 5:18am

    I tend to be very skeptical here. If anything, the establishment was clearly very pro-Hillary and even among the Republicans you could feel some pretty serious divide. So there wasn't much heavyweight support to such scheme. It would be hard to believe even if Clinton won since Trump gathered quite a lot of opposition just by opening his mouth.

    The result of the convoluted election was somewhat surprising (or not depending on how you see it) but I don't believe there was consistent fraud. It's worth some scrutiny considering who is making the claims.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    John Cressman, 23 Nov 2016 @ 5:23am

    Of course

    Of course e-Voting machines are hackable. That goes without saying. Anyone who tells you differently is either completely self deluded, a moron or a politician - or are they all the same?!

    I've been in IT for over 30 years. If there's one thing I've come to realize is that there is ALWAYS a backdoor - intentional or not - to every system, or there's a way to bypass things.

    I don't care what it is, there's a way. The only question is, is the end result worth the effort it will take to bypass security.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:18am

    The idea that HC would steal the election is given greater credibility because of the Wikileaks emails where she got the party apparatchiks to work against Sanders. She had history against her, of manipulating.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:34am

    Daily Garbage Kos

    Daily Kos is hateful liberal garbage. It is Soros propaganda and not news. It should be included in the fake and hateful news discussions. It has posted several very anti-Semitic articles and has funding sources tied to terrorist organizations.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      PaulT (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:45am

      Re: Daily Garbage Kos

      "It is Soros propaganda"

      "It has posted several very anti-Semitic articles"

      Wait, I'm confused. Most of the times I've ever read the name Soros, it's because he's a rich Jew who personally uses his money to try and push an agenda. I certainly never hear the name from anywhere except right-wing nuts with a conspiracy theory. Now you're saying the agenda he's pushing is anti-semitism? That actually seems likely to you?

      I wish you people would try to make sense with your nonsense theories. Perhaps try citing facts rather than ranting arguments that don't even make internal logical sense?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        I.T. Guy, 23 Nov 2016 @ 7:39am

        Re: Re: Daily Garbage Kos

        Maybe you should read some of his leaked emails.

        "Now you're saying the agenda he's pushing is anti-semitism?"

        Yes. He's given a lot of money to anti-Israel "organizations."

        Now... you won't find these answers on Faux Or CNN so sorry if you find the sources unpalatable.

        https://www.google.com/search?q=Soros&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=Soros+hacked+emails

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Seegras (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 7:58am

          Re: Re: Re: Daily Garbage Kos

          > > "Now you're saying the agenda he's pushing is
          > > anti-semitism?"
          > Yes. He's given a lot of money to anti-Israel
          > "organizations."

          Careful. Israel is not the same as Jews. And what's more, palestinians are a semitic people as well...

          And there's very good reason to have problems with the government of Israel, after they murdered Rabin.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 10:21am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Daily Garbage Kos

            "Careful. Israel is not the same as Jews. And what's more, palestinians are a semitic people as well... "

            That's funny, I seem to recall everyone having clearly different facts about this. You are of course correct, but no one refers to people that do not like Muslims as anti-semitic do they? Of course if you say anything bad about Judaism you get labeled as anti-semitic and anything bad about Muslims as being racist despite both being religions which do contain multiple cultures and races.

            Words have been co-opted to no longer mean what they used to mean. Good luck fighting that battle here at TD... people can't handle it!

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 11:58am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Daily Garbage Kos

            Many who make the claims will not understand your answer.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          PaulT (profile), 24 Nov 2016 @ 4:16am

          Re: Re: Re: Daily Garbage Kos

          "Yes. He's given a lot of money to anti-Israel "organizations." "

          That's not the same as anti-semitism. If you need an explanation, you should learn history and the many non-racial, non-religious reasons why Israel is controversial.

          "Now... you won't find these answers on Faux Or CNN so sorry if you find the sources unpalatable."

          I don't get my news from TV, especially not ones that have to make shit up to fit a 24 hour news cycle. Do you have anything trustworthy?

          "https://www.google.com/search?q=Soros&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=Soros+hacked+emails"

          T he first few sources - Russian news (RT), a horribly biased right-wing financial blog that's known to lie outright, a political blog with the same reputation, another of the same ilk, and one source (investors.com) that during the healthcare debate claimed that Stephen Hawking would be dead if he was under the UK healthcare system (Hawking, of course, is British and in response confirmed that he credited the NHS with superior care - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor's_Business_Daily#Notable_errors_and_retractions).

          Your sources include people who demonstrably write stories that are not only incorrect, but the mirror image of reality? Do you have anyone remotely credible, or just made up shit? Because these are clowns and liars, and not even very good ones.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:49am

      Re: Daily Garbage Kos

      And none of the links in the story link to DailyKos, so your point isn't relevant.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PaulT (profile), 24 Nov 2016 @ 4:05am

        Re: Re: Daily Garbage Kos

        I believe he's responding to a comment in another thread rather than the main article. So, the same level of attention to detail and honest discourse as the average conspiracy nut, then.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 11:16am

      Re: Daily Garbage Kos

      I'm

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 11:17am

      Re: Daily Garbage Kos

      I'm sorry the Soros conspiracy bingo card slot has already been filled in. Please try Buildaberger or Illuminati next time.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    RemoveThem, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:35am

    Enough is enough

    If anything, this should be THE wakeup call to remove electronic voting machines and allow verification of how votes were cast by the actual voter.

    Mail-in ballots, plus verification by voter (after the election) works in Washington state...

    As a side effect, this all Costs the state less per election.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:56am

    Needs proof

    For us to do something like contest an election I strongly feel there needs independently verifiable proof. I don't doubt that Halderman knows his stuff and has some data to back it up. But to do something that could potentially upend our political system, I feel we need evidence.

    Saying all that, I'd love if we did not spend the next four years under a Orange president who feels corruption and abuse of office for personal financial gain is a positive thing. Especially one that seems bent on setting new precedent for lies and hiding their financial motivations.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Groaker (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 7:23pm

      Re: Needs proof

      Just what would you consider proof?

      We know that the US government can not control the security of their computers because they have admitted it. At least 21 million individuals (I was one of them) had their dossiers, job applications, security checks and so on stolen by someone. Today it was admitted that about 130,000 sailors on active duty had their data stolen by someone. Many others inbetween these two incidents.

      How can anyone believe that a soda pop can of a voting computer is not hacked?

      Is that proof? No. Does it demonstrate an incredibly high probability of occurrence? Yes.

      If you want as much proof as you can get over the 'net, try

      BlackBoxVoting.org.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    I.T. Guy, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:56am

    Even as I don't trust e-voting machines, stories of actual hacked elections tend to be the kind of thing that conspiracy theory kooks tend to pass around, rather than anything substantiated in any real way.

    I dont get your logic Mike.
    "actual hacked elections"
    "rather than anything substantiated"
    Those two clash in the thought process. If they were actual hacked elections, implying "conspiracy Theorists" are citing actual true events; Then wouldn't they be substantiated?

    Haters will hate I guess.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      nasch (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 12:14pm

      Re:

      If they were actual hacked elections

      "...stories of actual hacked elections..."

      I have emphasized the critical part of the sentence which you omitted.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Indy, 23 Nov 2016 @ 7:07am

    Nate Silver

    538 got it so very very wrong they just stopped publishing election night, and "went to sleep."

    Forgive me if I don't trust Nate Silver's "statistical analysis," when the data he relies on is flawed from the start.

    We just can't really trust polls much anymore. There were variances of 10 points in many cases. That is huge in election polling where a deviance of 4 is fairly high and looked at suspiciously.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 7:31am

      Re: Nate Silver

      I don’t understand why people shit on 538 and Nate Silver for being “wrong” about the election when his prediction on that Tuesday afternoon was 65% Hillary 35% Trump, a far more charitable take than every other prediction I saw outside of sycophants like Scott Adams (including an alt-right cesspool which expected Trump to lose the election but gradually became ecstatic as the numbers came in).

      Lest anyone forget, forecasting that one outcome is more likely (2:1) than another does not make you wrong when the less likely outcome happens.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 8:00am

        Re: Re: Nate Silver

        Its a general lack of understanding statistics. Folks think of it as some sort law where anything over 50% is guaranteed to happen.
        He still had a one in three chance. That is very significant and nothing to laugh at. That is why I am so pissed that so many in my state stayed home and did not vote.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 10:52am

          Re: Re: Re: Nate Silver

          "That is why I am so pissed that so many in my state stayed home and did not vote."

          Why do you care if someone does not want to vote?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Steve R. (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 8:06am

        Re: Re: Nate Silver

        Reminds me of the "Minority Report", a story by Philip K. Dick.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 9:58am

      Re: Nate Silver

      You have no idea how polls and statistics work.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    crade (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 7:44am

    Lets see.. Super easy to hack, millions of people with very strong motive.. Nah, only a conspiracy theorist would believe someone would actually do it... I mean, what are the odds! Plus, it would be hard to hide from statistical analyses afterwards... I'm sure someone must care about that right?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    timmaguire42 (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 8:09am

    I let this slide the first couple times it came up, but it keeps coming up. "And, as Ed Snowden himself pointed out, hiding such a hack would be quite difficult" ?

    No, Edward Snowden pointed out that it could be made to be difficult. Which is not at all the same thing.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anomalous Cowherd, 23 Nov 2016 @ 8:12am

    Rigged?

    When Trump insisted before the election that the whole thing was rigged, I ascribed it to a sour-grapes defense mechanism he had adopted to soften the blow of his upcoming loss. The other possibility considered was that he was laying the groundwork for a challenge of the election results.

    Now I'm not as sure. Might it be that he had personal knowledge of attempts to rig the election by his supporters, assumed his opponents were engaged in the same efforts, and -with his obvious inability to think before speaking - blurted out the truth: that we no longer live in a country with a democratically elected government? What aspect of his persona runs counter to this suggestion?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 8:12am

    Have you done the Stinky Shoe Challenge? Google thinks you're a "community threat"...

    I'm randomly adding this unrelated item because I simply don't feel like waiting for Mike to get in another FaceBook bashing mood anytime he wants to distract people from something insidious that Google or YouTube is doing. Time and again he spouts off about how FaceBook has pulled down some completely innocent item like breastfeeding or cancer screening. Again, this is usually to distract people from a Google/YouTube item. In this case, YouTube is pulling down any video of anybody (even children) doing the "Stinky Shoe Challenge" (where people smell their shoes for however many mintutes like 5 etc.). Leave it to those fucktards to pass off something completely innocent as if it were some type of "perverted fetish". That's right - Google/YouTube is actually saying this is a "violation of community guidelines". I give the fuck up on them. No wonder people are leaving the "community" in droves to roll around in the grass or something (it seems superior I suppose). Last time I checked, "community guidelines" were crafted and then implemented by the people the community was comprised of, not by a small group of introverted think-they're-elites who make decisions and rules as arbitrary as their morning shit is long. Goodbye Google/YouTube. You're gonna blow away like a tumbleweed.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 11:21am

      Re: Have you done the Stinky Shoe Challenge? Google thinks you're a "community threat"...

      Oh look whatever is back.....

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 25 Nov 2016 @ 10:14am

        Re: Re: Have you done the Stinky Shoe Challenge? Google thinks you're a "community threat"...

        The insidiousness of Google/YouTube never went away, it just gets whitewashed again and again and again by the likes of Masnick.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 25 Nov 2016 @ 9:48pm

          Re: Re: Re: Have you done the Stinky Shoe Challenge? Google thinks you're a "community threat"...

          Oh look, out of the blue crawled out of the hole he's been hiding in.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    JOHN MAYOR, 23 Nov 2016 @ 9:19am

    THE TRUMPING OF TRUMP

    Well... Mike!... it would appear that there are MANY MORE voices to be added to the expressed concern than just that of J Alex Halderman! According to the info being provided at, http://www.channel3000.com/news/computer-experts-urge-clinton-to-challenge-election-results-in-wisco nsin/42594960 (approximately four hours old!), a NUMBER of computer scientists are expressing concern (indeed, these have met with top Clinton Aides last Thursday!)!... in addition to a wack of Attorneys (the latter, based on other online reportings!)! And!... I should point out, that Hillary (and her team!) have only until Friday to offer up any challenge to the Election results (the said deadline, for filing any such opposition to the Election results!)!
    .
    But!... these concerns notwithstanding, it would appear that, THE HEAT IS ON!... and that the PRESUMED "winner" of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election is in for a R-O-U-G-H R-I-D-E from here on out to the December 19 meeting of the Electors!... and, towards the meeting of the Congress on January 6! And you might want to take a look at, http://www.blueoregon.com/2016/11/oregon-can-help-abolish-electoral-college-right-now-no-really/, for a recent effort to challenge the Electoral College, for an additional peek into the present problems confronting Trump's "victory!
    .
    The just aforenoted being said, there's an even greater threat being posed to the Election results than the just cited "NVP Compact" story! And on that, I would have you note the following...
    .
    LITIGATIONALLY VS PETITIONALLY REMOVING THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE
    .
    .
    In even a cursory examination of this outrageous nigh past-- though, tentative!-- U.S. Election, at the root of the abysmal failure of the U.S. "Electoral System" to achieve a D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C Plurality, is its failure to facilitate the E-S-S-E-N-T-I-A-L D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C R-E-Q-U-I-R-E-M-E-N-T of a "D-I-R-E-C-T E-L-E-C-T-I-O-N", through a "O-N-E V-O-T-E-R, O-N-E V-O-T-E" Elections System! And due-- PRIMARILY!-- to the institution of a Republican preferred U-N-D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C "Electoral College"!... with "Electors", and INDIRECT "Electoral Votes"!
    .
    Consequently!... given the astounding and P-E-R-V-E-R-S-E Trump "win", numerous Petitions have now emerged online-- at least!-- to challenge, and to eliminate the Electoral College! To many Americans-- and I suggest, to MOST Americans!-- Trump becoming the "President-elect"... and despite losing the "popular vote"!... was-- and still is!-- A S-H-O-C-K T-O T-H-E C-O-R-E O-F D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y, A-N-D, T-O R-A-T-I-O-N-A-L P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L D-I-S-C-O-U-R-S-E! And the situation is reminiscent of the controversial 2000 Presidential race between George W. Bush and Al Gore!... in which Gore won the "popular vote", but, Bush was elected President!
    .
    Under the U.S Constitution, until the designated Electors of the Electoral College assemble in their state capitals to place in their votes (and in this present process, on December 19th!)... followed, by a meeting of Congress to affirm the result (and in this present process, on January 6th)!... things are still not fully settled! In most of the country, it's a "winner-takes-all" system: whoever wins a state's "popular vote" is awarded all the Electoral votes for that state! The catch is, that these votes are based on a state's number of Senators and House Representatives!... so, they vary from state to state! It's more important to win states with a high proportion of Electoral Votes-- like Trump taking Wisconsin, and Florida!-- than to receive the most votes overall! November 8th's U.S. vote, was-- technically!-- not to make Trump the next President, but, to determine who the 538 Electors in the various states across the country will be! It is those Electors who will bear the responsibility of casting the votes that will "legally elect" the next U.S. President (i.e.... and presently!... on December 19th!)! And it is for this reason, why millions of Hillary Clinton supporters... and supporters of "democracy"!... are anxious to lobby Electors, in an effort to trump Trump!
    .
    And so... this "mysterious victory" has reawakened... of course!... interest in, and has revived tactical approaches to, the elimination of the much criticized Electoral College! And, VEHEMENT criticisms!... and which are not only rife today, but, which have flurished for decades!
    .
    And, for example, David Boise... a lawyer who represented Gore, in Bush v. Gore, in 2000!... told the New York Times, that he considers the Electoral College a "historical anomaly"! A view, that has been echoed by millions online-- at least!-- since 2000!... and, by millions more, since November the 8th!
    .
    However!... the S-O-L-U-T-I-O-N to the evils inhere within this nearly completed U.S. Election, is not to place emphasis on merely changing the minds, and votes, of Electors!... as is currently the case with the Lady Gaga supported Change.org Petition (among other "Elector Lobby" Petitions!)... but, on challenging CONSTITUTIONALLY (and through TORT!... AND, NOW!), the inherent violation of the "Principles of Democracy (i.e., those respective of one's Democratic Right to a 'DIRECT ELECTION', and, to 'ONE VOTER, ONE VOTE'!)" through the present UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AND TORTIOUS DEFERENCE to the Electoral College in the first place!... and, to the "Colleg(e)al Conventions" that will finally determine who becomes President!
    .
    Challenging the Electoral College based on a "C-O-N-S-T-I-T-U-T-I-O-N-A-L I-M-P-E-R-A-T-I-V-E" to bind the Electoral College to the "Principles of Democracy", is as an important consideration for those desiring an end to the Electoral College, as it is for those desiring the beginning of D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C PLURALITIES! If the T-R-U-E "Principles of Democracy" are said (IN A SOUND COURT OF LAW!) to necessitate the B-I-N-D-I-N-G A-D-H-E-R-E-N-C-E of governments to the "popular decisions" of an electorate (R-E A-N-Y E-L-E-M-E-N-T T-H-A-T W-O-U-L-D P-O-R-T-E-N-D A-N E-L-E-C-T-O-R-A-T-E-'-S G-O-V-E-R-N-A-N-C-E!... and e.g., the Electoral College!)", then, a CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE (and TORT CHALLENGE!) against an ENTRENCHED MARGINALIZATION of an electorate's "popular vote" through a "S-L-I-G-H-T O-F H-A-N-D" and "E-N-D R-U-N" around the "Principles of Democracy (e.g., through the Electoral College!)", would go a long way toward "EXPOSING" what these Electoral mechanisms have been-- and are!-- all about! And!... MOST IMPORTANTLY!... such a challenge would reveal the veracity (or lack, thereof!) of the claims in support of the Electoral College!
    .
    The bottom line, is:... ANY ATTEMPT TO UNDERMINE THE B-I-N-D-I-N-G OF THE "POPULAR EXPRESSION" TO A "POPULAR ELECTION" BY WAY OF SOME "POLITICAL CIRCUMLOCUTORY OBFUSCATION (E.G., THE CLAIMS IN SUPPORT OF AN ELECTORAL COLLEGE!)", SHOULD BE MADE SUBJECT TO "JUDICIOUS" CONSTITUTIONAL (AND TORT!) ADJUDICATION! AND SUCH "COLLEG(E)AL CIRCUMLOCUTORY OBFUSCATION", SHOULD NOT BE MADE SYNONYMOUS WITH A "REASONED DEFINITION" OF, AND "REASONED APPROACH" TO, WHAT CONSTITUTES THE T-R-U-E "PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY"!
    .
    In the face of the EVIDENCE that the U.S. Electoral System is a breach of the "Principles of Democracy"!... and, that the process Americans have been about (i.e., involving the Electoral College-- at least!) has been a SHAM!... a competent court of jurisdiction could just as easily turn around, and say:... "You know... you guys (Senators and Congresspersons!) have been made WELL AWARE of the CLEAR CONSTITUTIONAL BREACHES inhere within the Electoral College! And so!... YOU ARE WITHOUT EXCUSE!... A-N-D Y-O-U A-R-E N-O-W O-B-L-I-G-E-D T-O A-M-E-N-D T-H-E P-R-O-C-E-S-S, F-O-R-T-H-W-I-T-H (and the stated Conventions of the Amending Formula, N-O-T-W-I-T-H-S-T-A-N-D-I-N-G!... and, the present Conventions and obligations of the Electoral College's Electoral voting process, N-O-T-W-I-T-H-S-T-A-N-D-I-N-G!)!!... AND TO INSTITUTE WHAT HAS BEEN CALLED FOR BY COUNTLESS JUDICIAL ADVOCATES AND ADVOCACIES, AND, BY SOUND JURIPRUDENCE!!"
    .
    Of course, the legal machinations to be pursued, depend on what's being argued before the court, and on how well this is presented!... and-- ultimately!-- before the US Supreme Court! But!... and for God's sake-- if for no one else's sake!... Senators and Congresspersons (and America's top legal minds!-- at least!) have been made FULLY AWARE of the "Principles of Democracy"!... and have been made FULLY AWARE of the need to UPHOLD THE "DEMOCRATIC WILL" of the Electorate! And so... it's not as if these learned political souls would be "blindsided" by a Court's decision, that these act... AND ACT NOW!... to remedy a centuries-old injustice! Adherence to a Constitutional Amending Formula is of less importance... as is adhering to the present legislated Electoral College's Electoral Conventions!... than adherence to the CORNERSTONE OF DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS!... THE CORNERSTONE OF DEMOCRACY! All a judge need say, is:... "Cut the cr*p!... and get on with it!"
    .
    And thus!... concerned Americans-- I believe!-- must refocus their efforts... FULL EFFORTS!-- AND FOREMOST!... ON SEEKING (N-O-W!) TO CONSTITUTIONALLY (AND THROUGH TORT!) TO UPHOLD THE "PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY"! And although Americans are free... of course!... to join in on the lesser "Electoral Lobby" Petitions, the "B-E-T-T-E-R R-E-T-U-R-N" will be from the suggested LEGAL ACTIONS (and through-- e.g.-- "Crowd Funding"!), and the "Abolitionist Petitions (such as those of MoveOn.org!... and, the like!)"! And!... inasmuch!... as the present ILLEGAL DENIAL of "DIRECT ELECTIONS", and of "ONE VOTER, ONE VOTE (by way of the very existence of the Electoral College!)", I-S T-H-E C-E-N-T-R-A-L P-R-O-B-L-E-M!
    .
    To sum up... the "Equal Protection Clause" is part of the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT to the United States Constitution! The clause... which took effect in 1868!... provides, that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction, "the equal protection of the laws (and, I'll add here, Equal Constitutional Protection re the application of the Constitution with respect to the state application of Electoral College Voting, and a state's elections law that applies to a given Federal Election!)"!
    .
    A primary motivation for this clause was to validate the "equality provisions" contained in the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which guaranteed that A-L-L P-E-O-P-L-E (and, I'll add here, ALL AMERICAN VOTERS!... AND REGARDLESS OF THE STATE IN WHICH A VOTER RESIDES!) would have Rights EQUAL to those of A-L-L C-I-T-I-Z-E-N-S (e.g., whatever is afforded in one state pertaining to Electoral College voting, and a state's elections law that applies to any given Federal Election, SHOULD BE AFFORDED TO A-L-L A-M-E-R-I-C-A-N-S!)! As a whole, the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT marked a large shift in "American Constitutionalism", BY APPLYING-- SUBSTANTIALLY!-- MORE CONSTITUTIONAL RESTRICTIONS AGAINST THE STATES THAN HAD APPLIED BEFORE THE CIVIL WAR!
    .
    The meaning of the Equal Protection Clause has been the subject of much debate!... and inspired the well-known phrase, "Equal Justice Under Law"! This clause was the basis for Brown v. Board of Education (1954)... the Supreme Court decision that helped to dismantle racial segregation! And!... which also formed the basis for many other Human Rights decisions which/ that REJECTED DISCRIMINATION AGAINST PEOPLE BELONGING TO VARIOUS GROUPS (and I'll add here, a "hoped-for" future decision:... a state's discrimination in its application of Electoral College voting, and in its creation and application of its elections law that applies to any given Federal Election, when compared to the creation and the application of such, state-to-state!... AND, DISCRIMINATION WITH RESPECT TO "DIRECT ELECTIONS", AND "ONE VOTER, ONE VOTE"!)!
    .
    And despite the said "fact" that the Equal Protection Clause itself applies only to state and local governments, the Supreme Court held in Bolling v. Sharpe (1954) that Equal Protection requirements within the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT apply to the Federal Government through the "DUE PROCESS CLAUSE" of the FIFTH AMENDMENT! IN OTHER WORDS, EQUAL PROTECTION AND BENEFIT REQUIREMENTS MUST APPLY STATE-TO-STATE, RE ANY ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTING, THE CREATION AND APPLICATION OF ANY STATE ELECTION LAW THAT WOULD APPLY TO A GIVEN FEDERAL ELECTION, AND, TO "DIRECT ELECTIONS", AND "ONE VOTER, ONE VOTE"!
    .
    Well, folks!... and to cut to the chase!... even in adopting the Conventions of the Electoral College (leaving aside-- for the moment!-- the issue of "DIRECT ELECTIONS", and "ONE VOTER, ONE VOTE"!), STATE-RUN ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTING, AND STATE-RUN ELECTION LAWS GOVERNING ANY GIVEN FEDERAL ELECTION BY WAY OF THE POWERS GRANTED STATES THROUGH ARTICLE II, SECTION 1 OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION (WHICH GIVES THE STATES EXCLUSIVE CONTROL OVER AWARDING THEIR RESPECTIVE ELECTORAL VOTES!), ARE PRESENTLY IN BREACH OF THE FEDERAL "DUE PROCESS CLAUSE" OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT OF THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION (AND THEREBY, FEDERAL "EQUAL PROTECTION AND BENEFIT", STATE-TO-STATE!), IN THAT, THE INDIVIDUAL STATES (BY MERE VIRTUE OF THEIR INDIVIDUAL APPROACH TO ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTING, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE CREATION AND APPLICATION OF STATE ELECTION LAWS THAT WOULD APPLY TO ANY GIVEN FEDERAL ELECTION!) S-Y-S-T-E-M-I-C-A-L-L-Y D-E-N-Y C-O-L-L-E-C-T-I-V-E/ U-N-I-L-A-T-E-R-A-L F-E-D-E-R-A-L D-U-E P-R-O-C-E-S-S A-N-D E-Q-U-A-L P-R-O-T-E-C-T-I-O-N A-N-D B-E-N-E-F-I-T T-O A-L-L A-M-E-R-I-C-A-N C-I-T-I-Z-E-N-S, WHEN THE RESPECTIVE STATES' ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTING AND ELECTIONS LAWS ARE COMPARED SIDE-BY-SIDE/ STATE-TO-STATE! BUT, MOREOVER, THIS STATE-TO-STATE BREACH OF FEDERAL "DUE PROCESS"... AND THUS, FEDERAL "EQUAL PROTECTION AND BENEFIT"!... WITH RESPECT TO THE STATE-TO-STATE APPARATUS FOR ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTING, AND THE CREATION AND APPLICATION OF STATE-TO-STATE ELECTIONS LAWS, DOESN'T EVEN TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE MORE SERIOUS BREACH OF FEDERAL "DUE PROCESS (AND THUS, FEDERAL 'EQUAL PROTECTION AND BENEFIT'!)", IN THE DISCRIMINATORY STATE-TO-STATE FAILURE TO FACILITATE "DIRECT ELECTIONS", AND "ONE VOTER, ONE VOTE"!
    .
    THEREFORE!... THE O-N-L-Y S-O-L-U-T-I-O-N THAT WILL END THIS STATE-TO-STATE DISCRIMINATION IN THE APPLICATION OF ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTING, THE CREATION AND APPLICATION OF RESPECTIVE STATE ELECTION LAWS TO ANY GIVEN FEDERAL ELECTION, AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF "DIRECT ELECTIONS" AND "ONE VOTER, ONE VOTE", IS THE ABANDONMENT OF BOTH ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTING AND STATE ELECTIONS LAWS, IN FAVOR OF THE CREATION OF ONE FEDERAL "DIRECT ELECTIONS, ONE VOTER, ONE VOTE" LAW!... AND, ELECTIONS PROCESS! BUT!... IN LIEU OF, AND IN ADVANCE OF THE LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING OF ANY SUCH LAW, ADVOCATES AND ADVOCACIES WHO/ WHICH CONTEST THE INEQUALITY OF ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTING, STATE ELECTIONS LAWS, AND, THE ABSENCE OF "DIRECT ELECTIONS" AND "ONE VOTER, ONE VOTE", WOULD DO WELL TO E-X-P-E-D-I-T-E T-H-E L-E-G-I-S-L-A-T-I-V-E P-R-O-C-E-S-S THROUGH THE I-M-M-E-D-I-A-T-E I-N-V-O-C-A-T-I-O-N OF THE NECESSARY CONSTITUTIONAL AND TORT MEASURES, T-H-A-T W-O-U-L-D S-E-E T-H-E "J-U-D-I-C-I-O-U-S E-F-F-E-C-T-A-T-I-O-N" O-F S-U-C-H A L-A-W, B-Y W-A-Y O-F A C-O-U-R-T-'-S R-U-L-I-N-G, T-H-A-T S-U-C-H A L-A-W, I-S "P-A-S-T D-U-E"!!
    .
    Your courts!... and your communities' learned legal minds (and, Crowd Funding resources!)!... await your calls! And the sooner, the better!!
    .
    Please!!... no emails!
    .
    P.S.: URGENT NOTICE: Please see, http://www.foxla.com/good-day/good-day-la-experts-and-other-guests/218882862-story

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Thad, 23 Nov 2016 @ 11:48am

    I remember there were Trump supporters here a few weeks ago saying that the election was going to be rigged by hacking voting machines.

    I ask those commenters: do you hold the same opinion now that you did then? Is your opinion of these allegations the same as it would be if the shoe were on the other foot, and the election had been called for Clinton but e-voting experts were raising red flags about the outcome?

    Same question goes for Clinton supporters, of course.

    Speaking for myself: my opinion is the same as it was a few weeks ago. Voting machines are certainly vulnerable. Attacking voting machines is not a reliable vector for influencing an election, and in cases where I've seen voting irregularities occur, they've likelier been caused by malfunctioning equipment than deliberate sabotage. And an election can't be influenced in this way unless it's already close.

    I will have to see evidence before I believe that voting machines were compromised (or failed in some other way, eg due to malfunction or human error). It is possible; it is unproven. No matter your political persuasion, you shouldn't believe something just because it feels right to you; you should wait for evidence.

    I'm with Mike here: I'm unconvinced that the election results were tampered with, but our voting machines are terrible either way, and need to be replaced. I'm increasingly of the opinion that good old-fashioned pen and paper is the only way to go.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      nasch (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 12:18pm

      Re:

      Personally I think it's very unlikely there wasn't vote tampering by both sides. Whether it actually affected the outcome I have no idea.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Groaker (profile), 24 Nov 2016 @ 9:15am

      Re:

      Then you haven't been paying attention.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Thad, 24 Nov 2016 @ 10:13pm

        Re: Re:

        Haven't been paying attention to what, Groaker? If you've got some evidence that voting machines were hijacked in this election and caused it to go a different way than it should have, please feel free to share with the class.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 25 Nov 2016 @ 6:29am

          Re: Re: Re:

          I gave you the best evidence on the net, and you ignored it. I guess it was just too much for your little heart to take.

          BlackBoxVoting,org

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            nasch (profile), 25 Nov 2016 @ 7:36am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            I gave you the best evidence on the net, and you ignored it. I guess it was just too much for your little heart to take.

            BlackBoxVoting,org

            There's a lot of stuff on that site, how about a specific document?

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Groaker (profile), 25 Nov 2016 @ 11:37am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Yes, there is a lot to read. But the net is full of TL;DR opinions. It is my opinion that that it is important to read the entire site No, it is not mine, nor do I have any affiliation with ther than reading it, and making the occasional donation.

              Clean, honest and accurate voting is key to the survival of a democratic republic. An understanding of just what is happening is vital to the preservation of our form of government. And that can only be gained through slogging through the history.

              Fifty years ago I didn't have the time (or the willingnes to accept the 1.2% risk of death) as I was forced to take a step forward and accept a two year induction to an absolutely meaningless war that served no purpose other than to kill almost 60,000 Americans and severely damage another 600-900,000. This was to no purpose. Never mind the deaths of two million or so Vietnamese. It also cost me the graduate school and studies of my choice. This was painful to me. yet others suffered so much incredibly more. This was for one of the most ridiculous wars under the face of the sun.

              Yet Americans, when asked to read the history of how their voting rights were stolen, have little to say other than TL;DR

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                PaulT (profile), 28 Nov 2016 @ 12:03am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                "Yes, there is a lot to read"

                The problem is not that there's a lot to read, the problem is that there'as a lot of false information, and a tendency for trolls to wave away honest;ly held dissenting opinions. You don't think the same as them? You must have read the "wrong" sites, or simply not understood the one they prefer. The idea that people debate facts and you have to cite your own evidence is often lost on them, sometimes deliberately, sometimes through arrogance or ignorance.

                I'm not saying you fit that category, but surely you can see why "you have to read this entire site front to back" with no context or discussion is not something that most people are going to do without a compelling reason.

                "It is my opinion that that it is important to read the entire site"

                But, you've yet to give anyone a reason why, other than some random guy on the internet says so. You haven't even given people a reason to look Surely, you see why this is problematic?

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Groaker (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 12:58pm

    E-Voting machines have been demonstrably hacked in front of those who were responsible for purchasing them, and the purchasing agents went ahead and bought them anyway.

    Has everyone forgotten the video of Baxter the Chimp which showed him reversing cast votes from within the voting booth?

    E-Voting machines are the most Stalinesque votoing device devised by man. And are taken advantage of by at least both major parties. This has been testified to under oath, but nobody seems to care. One of the worst cases of denial I have ever encountered.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Personanongrata, 23 Nov 2016 @ 3:50pm

    Snowden and Manning in 2020

    After All That, E-Voting Experts Suggest Voting Machines May Have Been Hacked For Trump

    The Experts are right Snowden and Manning have been cheated the election was Hacked.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 4:37pm

    Enough

    I wish all the websites would require proof of identity before allowing anybody to comment on any site. As evidenced by some of the comments above even tech sites are not safe from trolls who just want to make other people miserable. I don't understand why people do this at all. What is the point???????? No one should be allowed to express their opinion without showing who they are first. If peoples's names would appear in these posts no one would ever post such hateful nonsense!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      JOHN MAYOR, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:22pm

      Re: Enough

      Yeah!... just like the Jews had to be "IDed" during the Second World War, "TO KEEP THEM IN THEIR PLACE"! I think you've missed the point of the info at Google result, [Doc] Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, by David Kaye... prepared for the UN's Human Rights Council... A-N-D, W-H-I-C-H S-U-P-P-O-R-T-S T-H-E N-E-E-D F-O-R, A-N-D T-H-E R-I-G-H-T T-O, A-N-O-N-Y-M-I-T-Y O-N T-H-E N-E-T! And, basically, to protect INNOCENT PEOPLE from "N-E-O-N-E-T-N-A-Z-I G-A-T-E-K-E-E-P-E-R-S"!
      .
      The "NETTROLLING", and "NETTROLLICIDE", is coming from C-O-W-A-R-D-S who've got nothing better to do with their time, than spend HOURS, DAYS, AND WEEKS trolling for "style/ format victims", in order spread their D-I-S-E-A-S-E of "S-T-Y-L-E/ F-O-R-M-A-T I-M-P-E-R-I-A-L-I-S-M"!
      .
      And simply... and as far as I'm concerned!... these can go f themselves!!
      .
      Please!... no emails!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:31pm

      Re: Enough

      I can't wait till you discover Facebook.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Groaker (profile), 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:58pm

      Re: Enough

      You can't even use a handle, never mind an RL name. What a hypocrite.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Nov 2016 @ 6:43pm

    Until we have a viable third party nothing of any consequence will change for Joe Sixpack and Suzie Housecoat.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      JOHN MAYOR, 23 Nov 2016 @ 7:34pm

      Re:

      A-B-S-O-L-U-T-E-L-Y N-O-T!!... we don't need P-A-R-T-I-E-S!! We need A-N E-N-D to P-A-R-T-I-E-S!
      .
      Our municipalities have doing just fine without P-A-R-T-I-E-S! Parties get in the way of choosing the best/ brightest from across a country!... and from across a Legislature's floor!... to form our Executive Cabinets! What we need is an E-N-D to the "B-R-A-N-D-I-N-G" of our political apparatus!... and the B-E-G-I-N-N-I-N-G of a R-A-T-I-O-N-A-L A-P-P-R-O-A-C-H to governance (at whatever level!)!
      .
      This has been our problem with "democracies (so-called!)" for centuries! We treat our E-S-S-E-N-T-I-A-L political infrastructure like it was Disney World, or Mcdonalds!... AND WE WONDER WHY WE CAN'T TELL FACT, FROM FICTION!
      .
      If we didn't have P-A-R-T-I-E-S, then Ralph Nader could have stepped into governance, and saved many more millions of lives than the many he has already saved! But!... because we've chosen to H-Y-P-E the N-O-N-S-E-N-S-E, we've lost out on one of the best minds that American politics has ever received!... and the wisdom, that is his "stock-in-trade"!
      .
      It's a S--H-A-M-E!... A D-*-M-N S-H-A-M-E!!... that we've traded away efficiency, effectiveness, and C-A-R-E-- and I dare say, L-O-V-E for humanity!-- in our ostracizing the likes of Ralph Nader, for what has amounted to, a S-H-*-T-L-O-A-D of heartache, and pain! And I pray... that someday!... Ralph Nader (and souls like him!) will come to know the only TRUE GODLY PRESIDENT worth knowing!... and serving!
      .
      Please!... no emails!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      The Wanderer (profile), 25 Nov 2016 @ 8:48am

      Re:

      And we're never going to get a viable third party, on any meaningful scale, unless we switch to a ranked-preference voting system - preferably one which satisfies the Condorcet criteria - instead of our current "first-past-the-post" single-choice system.

      On which front there has actually been unexpected good news: Maine has reportedly adopted such a voting system, by ballot initiative this election cycle. I don't know its details, but if this is the toe in the door, there may be hope for the future yet...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    frankinbun, 24 Nov 2016 @ 12:34pm

    voting anomaly

    "the kind of thing that conspiracy theory kooks pass around"
    What conspiracies?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Thad, 24 Nov 2016 @ 10:16pm

      Re: voting anomaly

      "Bush stole Ohio in 2004 using hacked voting machines" would be an example of an unsubtantiated conspiracy theory.

      Not for nothin', so's this, for now. There are mountains of evidence that voting machines can be compromised, but I've yet to see any hard evidence that they have been compromised in the '16 election.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Groaker (profile), 25 Nov 2016 @ 6:56am

    Your favorite hobby must be putting words in other peoples mouths.

    I never claimed that this election was decided for any candidate by rigged voting. My issue is computerized voting. It is impossible to to have any assurance that the vote is valid. That the vote is private. "Voting" is now nothing more than an anodyne that provides an appearance of a democratic republic.

    Yes, there were problems with the old mechanical machines. A favorite tactic was to "vote" in the oppositions territory, hold down a candidates lever, and pull the main sweep lever. That would disable the machine and make the lines even longer. But that was small potatoes.

    One thing that I find truly amusing is that those who are reputedly on the left call me a rightist. Those on the right call me a leftist. My belief is that we need honest elections, and the electorate will have to live with their choice for four years.

    Left and right are no more than pejoratives to be thrown about meaninglessly. Anyone who proudly declares themselves to be completely aligned with the platform of one party or the other is incapable of thought, and merely a dog on a leash.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 25 Nov 2016 @ 10:12am

    They could also be hacked to help Hillary Clinton. Where is the proof?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 28 Nov 2016 @ 8:14am

    I can't believe anyone is still using e-voting machines!!! It was a number of years ago that we had them here where I live in CA for 1 year. I used it once, and never did after that. Don't know what happened to them or why, but never saw them again.

    Instead we use a much better method everyone else should be using. It's what everyone used growing up in school, using a #2 pencil and filling in bubbles. These days you can just use a pen. This is how we've been voting since then. You fill in the bubbles for what you want. When done, you bring it to a machine and stick the sheet(s) in yourself which is then scanned. Votes get counted that way.

    There's no hanging chad garbage. It takes a bit of effort to fill in a bubble, so you can't easily make mistakes. You have a nice Paper trail. It's a cheaper way to go then E-Voting machines. While I think fraud on these e-vote machines is pretty unlikely, why not just toss them and end this garbage once and for all.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    im a coward, 1 Dec 2016 @ 10:07pm

    I don't doubt Halderman's expertise on hacking voting machines. But did anybody see the really big IF in hacking the voting machines? I mean the machines are not linked in any way physically or virtually. Meaning, there's really no way to inject malware that'll spread to other machines automatically, unless you somehow infect all the memory cards that the voting centers use. Moreover, his hacking methods require someone with the intention to be alone with the machine for several minutes, so that the hacker can physically pull out the memory card and insert one with malicious code. And this has to been done for enough machines to even make any difference. Like I always say, if there's a key to the lock, hell, if there's a door, there's always a way to get in. What he has been claiming is similar to someone saying there's a way to break in and out of Fort Knox. Sure you can always get your hands on an M1 tank and run it right through the walls...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.