[ale] Its over. Maybe

[Jim Popovitch]

On Wed, 2004-11-03 at 20:31 -0500, Jeff Hubbs wrote:
> The two concepts are not in any way, shape, or form analogous to one
> another.  

Yes they are.  Both are machines, both count/control critical functions,
both produce data that is analyzed by an external device.

> The Diebold machines hide the voting process from their users
> and even their operators, 

No more so than a calculator hides the process by which mathematical
calculations are achieved.  One could argue that the Diebold box does
even less than a calculator.

> putting the company and parties unknown into a position to subvert
>  the election process with little fear of detection.

Sure, if you want to believe that.  I don't. That is just too extreme
for me to think that a company would willingly produce something that
could ruin itself.  You are just grasping for straws by suggesting such
a possibility.

> OSS voting machines and the means to prove that the OSS in question is
> really running on the machines is the only way to computerize the
> process with integrity.

What about the hardware and the firmware that the OSS runs on?  If
Diebold's black-box solution won't satisfy you how can some OSS app on
some other black-box?

-Jim P.