Paper ballot controversy

I think the concern, and I' m pretty sure this concern was raised in Stateside jurisdictions, is where's the physical proof that my vote was registered as I indeed voted, and that vote was counted? You have to rely solely on a machine that's controlled by others.

I heard a rumor that the person who knew how to program the machine was released from jail so he could rig the machines in a candidate's favor, and then returned to jail. People who don't trust the system feel paper ballots are more straight forward.

This is a concern in the states also. Where I used to live you voted on a "paper" ballot that you fed into a computer which counted the ballot. You kept a receipt from that ballot. But in some juristictions, you vote on the screen, press "enter" (or whatever) and the computer says - thank you, your vote is counted. But HOW DO YOU KNOW? No paper trail.

If all the paper ballot people used an absentee ballot, would that work?

The real problem is the "crackability" and being able to exploit the machines, and how they are made and work is supposed to be a secret, but is not. Also, those who would legitimately try to explore the vulnerabilities were being harassed with the DMCA.

Don't get me wrong; I have no fear of computers - they almost always perform as they were programmed unless the hardware fails, and that is pretty obvious. What I fear is the mistakes people make who create the software (firmware, whatever) - the computers don't make the mistakes, the people who create the software do.

A couple of articles about electronic voting:

http://www.physorg.com/news169133727.html

http://www.securityfocus.com/news/6530

This article talks about new exemptions from the DMCA for security research:

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/blakereid/new-dmca-exemption-security-research

Can someone explain to me what it is that Mr Bryan is upset about?

I suspect Adelbert is chiefly concerned that his scheme to "tweak" the election results may not work with the new-fangled voting method.

Given the players in this, I was thinking conspiracy theory...

i agree.

The real problem is the "crackability" and being able to exploit the machines, and how they are made and work is supposed to be a secret, but is not. Also, those who would legitimately try to explore the vulnerabilities were being harassed with the DMCA.

Don't get me wrong; I have no fear of computers - they almost always perform as they were programmed unless the hardware fails, and that is pretty obvious. What I fear is the mistakes people make who create the software (firmware, whatever) - the computers don't make the mistakes, the people who create the software do.

A couple of articles about electronic voting:

http://www.physorg.com/news169133727.html

http://www.securityfocus.com/news/6530

This article talks about new exemptions from the DMCA for security research:

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/blakereid/new-dmca-exemption-security-research

adelbert bryan is not the only one who has a concern about the shouptronic voting machines. this has been going on for quite awhile.

http://www.votersunite.org/info/Danaherinthenews.pdf (this will open as a pdf document, you need adobe reader to view it)

http://w2.eff.org/Activism/E-voting/gvs_electronic_1242_v0.3.pdf (more documented errors, some of which could not even be tracked by the admins, pdf document)

ever since those machines came here, they have been mired in controversy and people are asking for a way for the system to be accountable to those who have their doubts. this is what people are asking for, per this wikipedia article on voting technologies through the ages:

"Direct-recording Electronic Voting System

The successor to direct recording voting machines, a direct-recording electronic (DRE) voting system records votes by means of an electronic display provided with mechanical or electro-optical components that can be activated by the voter; that processes voter selections by means of a computer program; and that records that processed voting data in memory components. It produces a tabulation of the voting data that is stored in a removable memory component and may also provide printed renditions of the data. The system may further provide a means for transmitting the processed vote data to a central location in individual or accumulated forms for consolidating and reporting results from precincts at a central location. DRE systems additionally can produce a paper ballot printout that can be verified by the voter before they cast their ballot."

that leads me to this link on paper audit trails and electronic voting machines:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_Verified_Paper_Audit_Trail