It's funny, other than fuckery, what the fuck would be "proprietary" for tabulation? It's a fucking sorting and adding machine, there shouldn't be any "black magic" lines of code to sort and add, it should be straight forward.
Correct. Why do these machines even have an option for fractional voting or making two of Candidate A's votes only count as 1.5 vote, etc.
Imagine if banking software ran this way. You'd log into your bank, deposit $2000, but oops, now you only have $1500 and another account holder got the other $500. Whoops!
The media is gaslighting that "glitches are normal" but this is simple counting software. If glitches were this normal, no one would ever use online banking.
Ah no, you don't understand. It's very complicated. It's uh it's aggregate, so I'm talking about fractions of a vote here. And over time they add up to a lot.
I'm just talking about fractions of a vote here, but we do it from a much bigger election and we do it a couple of million times.
I firmly believe that someone who finished freshman year in a computer science degree could make a vote tallying application. Its literally just incrementing like 5 variables.
Yeah, you literally could. The code to actually scan the ballot may be a bit more complex, but the actual counting is just "if(vote == canidate_1) {canidate_1_votes++} else if(vote == canidate_2) {canidate_2_votes++} etc etc all the way down for each canidate. I'm sure it could be done more efficiently, but the point remains you're just taking a couple variables and adding 1 each time they get a vote. It's not rocket science.
If it was just dumb counting software, it should be relatively simple. What should just be a simple counting program with full paper logs of every action taken probably has morphed into something that tries to do way too much.
Enterprise software companies usually pile every random feature into their program, schmooze and wine and dine the executives in charge of making the final decision, and then give the purchaser easy justification for choosing the complicated software because they get treated like a king and can easily justify buying the complex software because it has more features.
Even besides manipulation and weighting functions, I'd imagine this software has lots of tools for communicating with other machines, sending and reporting data to central sources, being remotely controllable, and many other features that are unnecessary for the core functionality. Buried within this complexity it's easy to encounter actual bugs and hide manipulation functionality even from employees trained in this software's use.
What should be used is some kind of simple, open source counting software available on sites like Github and fully audited every year by multiple nerds.
Probably because there was customer demand for it. Then the source code can stay the same and the users can adjust the fractional percentage to what ever they “need”. The company can say “Hey, we had nothing to do with it, talk to whomever configured it.”
But these machines/companies get government contracts for this shit, so we need to look at who approved purchasing them. And states like Texas who said "hell no" to Dominion due to all of these vulnerabilities.
Thank you, we have a cabin here too! Such a great lake for fishing and boating. Most of it is not more than 4-5' deep. You can walk hundreds of feet out and still stand in sand.
It's funny, other than fuckery, what the fuck would be "proprietary" for tabulation? It's a fucking sorting and adding machine, there shouldn't be any "black magic" lines of code to sort and add, it should be straight forward.
Correct. Why do these machines even have an option for fractional voting or making two of Candidate A's votes only count as 1.5 vote, etc.
Imagine if banking software ran this way. You'd log into your bank, deposit $2000, but oops, now you only have $1500 and another account holder got the other $500. Whoops!
The media is gaslighting that "glitches are normal" but this is simple counting software. If glitches were this normal, no one would ever use online banking.
Ah no, you don't understand. It's very complicated. It's uh it's aggregate, so I'm talking about fractions of a vote here. And over time they add up to a lot.
I'm just talking about fractions of a vote here, but we do it from a much bigger election and we do it a couple of million times.
Been lurking a long time. Had to sign up so I could give you props for your Office Space reference.
Dems are taking votes from the crippled children!?
I firmly believe that someone who finished freshman year in a computer science degree could make a vote tallying application. Its literally just incrementing like 5 variables.
spez: typo
Yeah, you literally could. The code to actually scan the ballot may be a bit more complex, but the actual counting is just "if(vote == canidate_1) {canidate_1_votes++} else if(vote == canidate_2) {canidate_2_votes++} etc etc all the way down for each canidate. I'm sure it could be done more efficiently, but the point remains you're just taking a couple variables and adding 1 each time they get a vote. It's not rocket science.
You would use a switch statement. Switch(cantidate){ Case "trump": Trump++; Break; Case "biden" Biden++; Break;}
If it was just dumb counting software, it should be relatively simple. What should just be a simple counting program with full paper logs of every action taken probably has morphed into something that tries to do way too much.
Enterprise software companies usually pile every random feature into their program, schmooze and wine and dine the executives in charge of making the final decision, and then give the purchaser easy justification for choosing the complicated software because they get treated like a king and can easily justify buying the complex software because it has more features.
Even besides manipulation and weighting functions, I'd imagine this software has lots of tools for communicating with other machines, sending and reporting data to central sources, being remotely controllable, and many other features that are unnecessary for the core functionality. Buried within this complexity it's easy to encounter actual bugs and hide manipulation functionality even from employees trained in this software's use.
What should be used is some kind of simple, open source counting software available on sites like Github and fully audited every year by multiple nerds.
Probably because there was customer demand for it. Then the source code can stay the same and the users can adjust the fractional percentage to what ever they “need”. The company can say “Hey, we had nothing to do with it, talk to whomever configured it.”
But these machines/companies get government contracts for this shit, so we need to look at who approved purchasing them. And states like Texas who said "hell no" to Dominion due to all of these vulnerabilities.
I've been on that lake... my uncle has a 100 year old cabin there... good catfish! The smaller ones, anyway.
Thank you, we have a cabin here too! Such a great lake for fishing and boating. Most of it is not more than 4-5' deep. You can walk hundreds of feet out and still stand in sand.
For security reasons you might want to keep encryption methods secret.
...but that's exactly why the ties to the establishment are extremely suspect.
"Don't worry about us hacking the bank servers, we're just in close contact with the people who built them + set the password."