computer scientists
I didn’t go to many classes during University, but I remember one class very well, on of the Cryptography classes, the professor spent the entire 2 hours explaining point by point why voting machines are a bad fucking idea and how many new problems it introduces over having to count paper ballots, which is literally the only issue with paper ballots, you need more people, time to count them. They are very hard to fake and if you manage to do it, you can only fake a few votes, compare it with voting machines which are still hard to breach, but if you do you can change election results, this is just the one of many issues.
Paper ballots with machine scanning seems like the ultimate combo. Full paper trail and counting is still fast for 99.9% of the votes. The other 0.1% might take some deciphering if the smudge is actually a mark or an erased mark, or if that tiny dot is intended to be a mark. But, given we are talking 0.1% of the votes here, it generally won’t matter, and when it does, having the full paper trail is 100% worth it.
Some contests were won by 100k votes that’s worth a recount to me.
So a couple of points:
“could even develop malware designed to be installed with minimal physical access to the voting equipment by unskilled accomplices to manipulate the vote counts. Attacks could also be launched by compromising the vendors responsible for programming systems before elections, enabling large-scale distribution of malware.”
-
This is not the bullshit theory of “ZOMG! They were connected to Starlink! Elon Musk! Elon Musk!”
-
There is no such thing as “security” if someone has physical access to the device.
Brings to mind the whole pagers thing.
There is no such thing as “security” if someone has physical access to the device.
We’ve gotten a lot closer. With fTPM, FDE, boot verification, etc. it’s become a lot more secure than it used to be.
I completely agree, but it doesn’t matter unless someone does something about it.
-
Hopefully this is what gets him /s
“here’s how Bernie could still win”
he could still win. here’s how:
Trump prooved laws don’t matter if your following is violent enough. Bernie can still win, I have an idea . . .
My thoughts, and I would really, really love for someone to offer me a sliver of hope.
- They only have to pick a few counties with surprising results and audit those to figure out if there’s a widespread problem worth a more extensive recount, right? I realize that’s still far more work than I probably realize, but I feel like it would be a good litmus test for “there is something here” or “there is not, sorry folks.”
- Anyone have any faith at all that Dems will pursue the actual possibility of fraud with a fraction of the verve that Republicans have pursued fictitious voter fraud?
- I’ve been silently praying that on November 6th someone in Kamala’s circle had already thought of my first bullet point above, that this is already in progress, and they won’t talk about it until they are done, but also see my second bullet point. 😁
My hope died when she conceded. It’s the same thing that happened in 2016…there were a bunch of counties that we way off their polls. The D’s didn’t care and let us slide.
My tinfoil hat says it’s just too profitable for the D’s to have Trump in office. They don’t have to accomplish anything, publicly wring their hands loudly, and the donations pour in.
The election is over and they’ve made their money. There’s no profit to be had in demanding recounts.
Something certainly feels off and when looking at the data, it’s seems to throw some red flags. I’m going to toss these here because trying to rehash everything on this thread isn’t helpful.
https://www.reddit.com/r/somethingiswrong2024
Feel like I’m being a conspiracy theorist here, but I feel it’s better to at least say something or draw attention to it. Since I do data analytics, I’ll be running the numbers myself if I can.
