Their imaginary ‘fake’ voter investigation is just them projecting their own will. Pre-justify being an evil bastard type of thing.
It is both real and not real, but it’s definitely “less real” than most people realize, or put better, is but a very tiny slice of the overall reality, which itself isn’t actually all that real.
3 Likes
IKR?
It’s so obvious, I mean gosh, he’s not even registered to vote!
3 Likes
Is this the real life?
Is this just fantasy?
Caught in a landslide,
No escape from reality.
13 Likes
And the NSA was going to sit on this until… forever?
11 Likes
Probably the part where NSA confirms that this is happening…
2 Likes
If I wanted to be generous, I’d say they wanted to consolidate their findings before going more open about them.
1 Like
The thing that would most worry me is if a voting machine company had any access to electoral data. Elementary security would suggest that the machine company should be provided with test data not relating to any real people; and the people responsible for putting in the data should have no access to the details of the software, so they could not game it. A third, independent organisation should audit both the test data and the software, but have no access to live data.
This is just basic quality management - you don’t allow Production to modify the measuring equipment, you don’t allow the measuring equipment supplier to collude with Production (in order to gain favours); and QA ensures that the equipment complies with the specification but does not interfere with QC.
4 Likes
So what’s this about the Intercept being responsible for outing the whistle blower?
If halal food and taco trucks are the future liberals want, then sign me the f**k up for two of everything! Can I get some pho with that as well, or will that trigger too many snowflake conservative politicians now in their 70s that had their parents get them out of the war?
3 Likes
I’m sure the administration was working day and night to…nah
1 Like
from a nyt article
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/05/us/politics/reality-winner-contractor-leaking-russia-nsa.html?_r=0
In a statement, the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, praised the operation. “Releasing classified material without authorization threatens our nation’s security and undermines public faith in government,” he said.
1 Like
Seriously? They gave a copy away to get a leak authorised?
What the hell…? Who the heck…? Why the fuck…?
1 Like
What are you, some kind of luddite!? Paper ballots will NEVER work! 
1 Like
Elementary security suggests that you don’t use voting machines at all. They’re a completely unnecessary point of potentially catastrophic failure.
The reason why countries other than the USA avoid voting machines isn’t because we’re impoverished primitives. It’s because we considered them, and concluded that they were an obviously fucking stupid idea.
9 Likes
There’s no sign that the leaker made any effort to obscure her identity, and it’s obviously in the NSA’s interest to discourage other leaks to The Intercept.
I’m waiting to see a response from The Intercept regarding the Ars Technica claims before drawing conclusions. So far, all they’ve released is this:
1 Like
I feel that either way they should be protected under " freedom of the press "
Its not the press’ fault for gov doing things they aren’t suppose to or keeping info that should be public obscured
I disagree. Anyone who knows anything about places like Northern Ireland knows that paper ballots are equally open to manipulation. A ruling party can even exclude ballots on the grounds that “the cross went over the edge of the box”.
It is perfectly possible to design a satisfactory electronic voting system. It just costs money. Look at supermarket tills. They record, accurately, enormous numbers of diverse transactions such that by the end of the day all sales are known and re-ordering can take place automatically. There are built in cross checks. But care and effort has gone into them because supermarkets need to make money. Voting machines are designed by incompetents presumably because someone has bribed them to do it, i.e. the pressure for them to be breakable exceeds the pressure to be accurate.
In this country we have two organisations overseeing voting; the Electoral Commission, the arm of government, and the Electoral Reform Society, a not for profit which is independent. I am sure that between them they could specify an adequate electronic voting system if there was a demand for it. But, as I understand it, the US system of oversight - where it even exists - is fragmented. That may well be part of the problem.
1 Like
There’s more to voting than accuracy.
