While I do not know the ballot ordering rules of Georgia, I do know as a programmer, a bug that swapped votes would be very obvious, especially if the name order of the ballots remains the same across all ballots. It CERTAINLY would show up in the software companies internal testing. There is zero way they let the software leave their doors without testing it. And they would have noticed vote flipping in their software. Even if these companies are run by pelosi and Feinstein, they would want to catch this bug if it was not intentional as it could hurt their candidate too.
Also this bug would not "just do enough to tip the election". Computers are very consistent with everything including their problems, we are not in space dealing with radiation flipping bits. It would also mean that in different states, that use the same software, you would almost certainly see the bug favor a different candidate. The chances that this bug just does enough to win the election, only for biden, in multiple states is basically zero.
A far more reasonable explanation to what we are seeing is either human error somewhere in the chain, an intentional software feature, or intentional human changes. Not a bug.
100% agree. Even in the worst case scenario, a bug like this, if it got into a major election before discovery, it'd not only invalidate the whole election (...hmmm!), but it'd have to be fixed as the absolute highest priority and certainly before the next election.
And yet, I read somewhere on here that this problem's been in play since 2016 and was documented sometime in 2018.
Oh, I'll add that even human error wouldn't skew towards one candidate exclusively. Thus, intentional "feature" or else an intentionally exploited vulnerability (fraud).
I can say as a dev who's done Govt. contracts for a long time, vendors absolutely let code out the door with shoddy testing like, a disturbing amount across the board, and have issues make it to production. I've never seen anything quite like it in the private sector.
That said, as we all know, this flipping stuff sure as shit wasn't a bug! Bugs break functionality, not create convenient side-effects to help very specific use cases.
Once I started my first programming job, I started writing JUnit tests for one of my department's big projects. I don't know anything is functional here.
It actually can be if they are using fuzzy algorithms such as neural networks.
If they are using trained neural networks for text recognition on the ballots, which is highly possible, their model (processing program) can be trained on incomplete training samples data and would fail in the real world application. When the real data comes in, accuracy of a model drops significantly almost instantly, and that require manual relabeling of erroneous data, feeding it back into training loop and updating all the voting machine software on-the-fly as models updates are published.
It's a non-reliable technology that extremely depends on peculiarities of training data. It may fail when you are using different pen color, print template differs even slightly from the training data or even lighting was a little bit different in scanning area and in training data.
YOU NEVER EVER SHOULD USE THIS KIND OF TECHNOLOGY WHEN ABSOLUTE ACCURACY IS REQUIRED. Who the hell cares if your model accuracy is 95%. It means 5% of ballots are lost, that would be unacceptable. You would not want to have a optional surgery that fails 5% of a time? That would be too much of a risk.
While I do not know the ballot ordering rules of Georgia, I do know as a programmer, a bug that swapped votes would be very obvious, especially if the name order of the ballots remains the same across all ballots. It CERTAINLY would show up in the software companies internal testing. There is zero way they let the software leave their doors without testing it. And they would have noticed vote flipping in their software. Even if these companies are run by pelosi and Feinstein, they would want to catch this bug if it was not intentional as it could hurt their candidate too.
Also this bug would not "just do enough to tip the election". Computers are very consistent with everything including their problems, we are not in space dealing with radiation flipping bits. It would also mean that in different states, that use the same software, you would almost certainly see the bug favor a different candidate. The chances that this bug just does enough to win the election, only for biden, in multiple states is basically zero.
A far more reasonable explanation to what we are seeing is either human error somewhere in the chain, an intentional software feature, or intentional human changes. Not a bug.
100% agree. Even in the worst case scenario, a bug like this, if it got into a major election before discovery, it'd not only invalidate the whole election (...hmmm!), but it'd have to be fixed as the absolute highest priority and certainly before the next election.
And yet, I read somewhere on here that this problem's been in play since 2016 and was documented sometime in 2018.
Oh, I'll add that even human error wouldn't skew towards one candidate exclusively. Thus, intentional "feature" or else an intentionally exploited vulnerability (fraud).
I can say as a dev who's done Govt. contracts for a long time, vendors absolutely let code out the door with shoddy testing like, a disturbing amount across the board, and have issues make it to production. I've never seen anything quite like it in the private sector.
That said, as we all know, this flipping stuff sure as shit wasn't a bug! Bugs break functionality, not create convenient side-effects to help very specific use cases.
Once I started my first programming job, I started writing JUnit tests for one of my department's big projects. I don't know anything is functional here.
It actually can be if they are using fuzzy algorithms such as neural networks. If they are using trained neural networks for text recognition on the ballots, which is highly possible, their model (processing program) can be trained on incomplete training samples data and would fail in the real world application. When the real data comes in, accuracy of a model drops significantly almost instantly, and that require manual relabeling of erroneous data, feeding it back into training loop and updating all the voting machine software on-the-fly as models updates are published. It's a non-reliable technology that extremely depends on peculiarities of training data. It may fail when you are using different pen color, print template differs even slightly from the training data or even lighting was a little bit different in scanning area and in training data.
YOU NEVER EVER SHOULD USE THIS KIND OF TECHNOLOGY WHEN ABSOLUTE ACCURACY IS REQUIRED. Who the hell cares if your model accuracy is 95%. It means 5% of ballots are lost, that would be unacceptable. You would not want to have a optional surgery that fails 5% of a time? That would be too much of a risk.
But since that "bug" always favor Biden, I highly doubt that it is the case. It is an intentional interference.
Dude, there aren't Neural Networks for this shit. You don't need a neural net for processing circles on ballots
You'd be amazed on the level of incompetency in software development. All that diversity hiring and affirmative action takes its toll.