[Blood of Tyrants]

Yep. An easier solution is to have a hard printout that is viewable after the voter is finished for postive verification. That way every machine can be verified after the election for monkey business.

[massgopguy]

We fill in the circle next to the name with a Sharpie. Works every time. But...wasn't it the Democrats who demanded these voting machines after Floriduh in 2000?

[MineralMan]

"Yep. An easier solution is to have a hard printout that is viewable after the voter is finished for postive verification. That way every machine can be verified after the election for monkey business."

---

I agree completely. If they're going to use computers for voting machines, then a hard copy printout of each voters choices should be an absolute requirement. Let the voter take it home with him/her.

Still, I have no doubt that I could code around all of that and manipulate a tabulation. So could any really competent programmer. Whoever the state will be hiring to look at these programs will have had nothing to do with writing them. Knowing that, I could bury routines to manipulate a tabulation, scattering lines of code throughout the program, making them look like they actually functioned in another routine, but really operating together as a hidden subroutine, doing pretty much whatever I wanted them to do.

Nobody but someone who knew the program could find them. And I doubt if the government is capable of hiring a really competent person to do the review of the code in the first place.

Of course, my programs were written solely by me, and my programming style is, shall we say, unorthodox. One of my applications was over 150,000 lines of code, all uncommented. I didn't need the comments, so I didn't put them in. Over several revisions, the thing got pretty complex, internally. I'm quite certain that not another soul could have figured out how the thing worked.

This was in Visual Basic, up to version 3.0, where you could use undeclared Global variables. The program had over 400 of them. I knew them all, but since they were undeclared, I can't imagine how anyone else would figure it out.

Yes, I'm a sloppy, sloppy programmer. Never mind. That program worked very, very well, and sold quite well, too.

[Almondjoy]

Put a routine in that makes the machine print the opposite of the vote tallied and you can still have chaos.

[Sonny M]

Yep. An easier solution is to have a hard printout that is viewable after the voter is finished for postive verification.

How would you find a way that would make sure to protect the privacy of someones vote?

Its almost a guarantee that liberal organizations would use underhanded tactics to verify its members and others voted the way they wanted them to vote.

I can't tell you how many teachers I know in NYC, who voted for Bush but would never ever admit it in public or to the people they work with.