Posted on 12/24/2022 4:41:08 AM PST by MtnClimber
I am pretty technical. I was surprised that shrink to fit became a talking point at the hearing on Thursday in Maricopa County.
I primarily know of one program that offers a shrink to fit option: Excel. Shrink to fit is, in my understanding, an application-level setting. Some copiers have a shrink to fit option, but it takes a literal picture and resizes it. That process does take some time and computing resources, and that copier is usually on the expensive side of the equation.
What I missed Thursday is where they allege that the shrink to fit option was set. If they are alleging that it was set in the voting application software, the software should have audit trails for changes, and we should be able to see if that was indeed the case.
If they are alleging that the change was made in the printer, then did anyone check the printer manual to see if that was indeed an option?
I have worked with Oki, Brother, HP, Epson, etc., and I can't remember the printers generally having a shrink to fit option. Printers are designed to receive data and print it. There is only so much processing power in a printer, and typically, printers just don't have the processing power required to resize an image. That is ultimately what shrink to fit does. It performs an image-resizing function.
If it was not the printer configuration, then did someone check the application to see if it has a shrink to fit option? For example, Microsoft Word does not have that option in the print settings. Microsoft PowerPoint does not have a shrink to fit option.
I know that the lawyers were throwing a curve with this admission, but just because you are familiar with shrink to fit in Excel...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
It could only be fraud.
They were tested before being installed at each precinct.
Yep, even that mysterious increase of 25,000 more ballots after all the poll centers closed.
In Pima Co. AZ when you check in and show your ID they print out your ballot and hand it to you.
Then you take it over to a “booth” and fill in the ovals to vote.
Then you walk over and put it in the tabulator. Except in my small precinct we haven’t had our own tabulator for at least 6 years, so we only have the “Box 3” option.
I think Maricopa Co. uses the same system.
I would assume shrink to fit would take into account the length and width of the paper else you get distortion. Also the marks on the printed ballot used to align the selections for the reader would be moved by shrink to fit. Therefore:
Changing the paper size in the printer would distort any ballot cast if shrink to fit was implemented.
An upsample of an image is done by pixel replication. Distortion. Weren’t those ballot selections printed using QR codes?
Election, what election?
Put a fork in it.
Good luck.
Not expecting a miracle.
Yes, but not quickly. It requires reformatting and cannot be done on the fly by clicking a setting.
So this would be “print-on-demand” ballots - and if they resized the print - the optical reader would mis-read (or not read at all)
Plus there are easy manual ways to reduce or expand the size of a document, as well as an image of it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.