Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, MACHINES. Simple machines that the average person could look at and understand the mechanics. Nothing hidden in a 100,000 lines of spaghetti code that only a software engineer or hacker can figure out. Black box technology has absolutely NO place in voting systems.
And ones with clear audit trails that anyone of basic intelligence could look at and understand.
The problem isn't machine counting or hand counting, that's just democrat gaslighting. The problem is stuffing the ballot box in the middle of the night.
Yes, MACHINES. Simple machines that the average person could look at and understand the mechanics. Nothing hidden in a 100,000 lines of spaghetti code that only a software engineer or hacker can figure out. Black box technology has absolutely NO place in voting systems.
Where would you draw the line between a simple machine and a more complex one?
The title of the thread is, "Some in GOP want ballots to be counted by hand, not machines." So, a machine is a machine, whether simple or complex.
Where would you draw the line between a simple machine and a more complex one?
The title of the thread is, "Some in GOP want ballots to be counted by hand, not machines." So, a machine is a machine, whether simple or complex.
Okay, hand count it is. Not a problem for me. Redundant counting by all parties involved with witnesses/observers from all parties.
Now, I know that isn't going to happen because we live in a lazy, push-button society. But if we want secure, fair, transparent elections, that's what needs to be done. As I said, absolutely NO back box technology.
Of course, as I already pointed out in this thread, if that happened, waiting a week or more to get the results of elections would become the norm, and then there would be screams of people thinking the fact it takes so long to get the results would mean it was rigged.
A machine that doesn't involve software or an internet connection is simple. A machine that involve software or an internet connection is complex.
I'd take it further than that. Simple would be a mechanism the average person could examine and understand the functionality.
Or, if we are talking computer code, a stand-alone code so simple that the average person could read through it and understand the flow and functionality. A simple computer program to read a "fill-in" card could be written in a 100 lines or less (high level language like C++) by a good programmer and would not need any calls outside the program itself. No internet connection and no mysterious 3rd party software.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 10 days ago)
35,635 posts, read 17,982,736 times
Reputation: 50666
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007
Where would you draw the line between a simple machine and a more complex one?
The title of the thread is, "Some in GOP want ballots to be counted by hand, not machines." So, a machine is a machine, whether simple or complex.
Well, no. There are simple machines and more complex computer driven machines.
For example, in the case of a very simple machine count you could have each vote on a separate piece of paper. (One piece of paper for president, one for senators, propositions, whathaveyou).
The machine would, through a visual eye, "read" where the dot was placed on the paper and kick the paper either to the right or the left inbox. To sort the ballots. Then, a counter of pieces of paper would count the total in each box. All of it would be then verifiable by human counters, quickly, if need be, and could be stored in lock boxes for years after the election.
There would of course always be the problems with people who can't manage to fill in a bubble, but that's way down in the noise.
And then, of course, when the election doesn't go the way some people want it to go, they'll claim ballot box stuffing or ineligible voters. So you can't win no matter what.
Or, if we are talking computer code, a stand-alone code so simple that the average person could read through it and understand the flow and functionality. A simple computer program to read a "fill-in" card could be written in a 100 lines or less (high level language like C++) by a good programmer and would not need any calls outside the program itself. No internet connection and no mysterious 3rd party software.
How do you know that modern election counting software isn't already like that?
I write code for a living, and some of the stuff you see these days written in languages like C# isn't really all that complicated.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
