It's probably because reporting early turns into a kind of competition among the precincts. Early reporting is kinda good practice, as well, because early reports aren't late reports that somehow have a purplish precinct reporting ninety-eight percent participation with ninety percent single-party straight-ticket voting.
But ... our election systems are pretty fucked up, and yeah, pencil and paper is what we need to do again.
Disclaimer: I worked on election systems software in 1995-96, but not for the company mentioned in this article. Double disclaimer: the people involved in running that industry are (well, were, when I was doing that work) mostly ex-spooks from three-letter agencies, entirely obsessed with a weird warrior-mentality version of fighting for democracy (ends justifies means) and entirely creepy as hell (as in: if you're ever alone in a room with one, count your money, then your organs, then check on all your family members and friends ... scary creepers, though maybe a lot of that was for effect, can't say).
In my little country (20 million voters) we also manage to use paper ballots and manual counting. Results are reliably available for most precincts within 12 hours of the polls.closing. Whats so difficult about this?
if you've discovered the inadequacies, imagine what a room full of 125+ IQ folks, who've been training in logic and computer systems since they were 8, and are putting in 14 hour days that are powered by gov't issued pills have found?!
Some of them have been caught cheating to the point where elections were redone. This is an indication of how bad it was or else how tired someone in charge has gotten of having that taint all over their elections. Also, those voting systems that have been exposed to the internet could have the relevant bug already in place and ready to go. It's been demonstrated, on YouTube. No matter how sincere and careful the actual poll workers are, once the results get sent past the implanted bug, the intended results are all that is sent on for counting. Note - this is not just the individual machines, with this style of bug, but the collection and transmission system, IIRC. Hence, all the safeguards on the voting machines are bypassed. Paper ballots are safer, as long as you don't have the ratfuckers doing the actual counting in the districts they are after. Electronic machines? A prime ingredient in the recipe for election fraud.
I have a vape that uses a USB C.
In US, chad hangs you.
It's probably because reporting early turns into a kind of competition among the precincts. Early reporting is kinda good practice, as well, because early reports aren't late reports that somehow have a purplish precinct reporting ninety-eight percent participation with ninety percent single-party straight-ticket voting.
But ... our election systems are pretty fucked up, and yeah, pencil and paper is what we need to do again.
Disclaimer: I worked on election systems software in 1995-96, but not for the company mentioned in this article. Double disclaimer: the people involved in running that industry are (well, were, when I was doing that work) mostly ex-spooks from three-letter agencies, entirely obsessed with a weird warrior-mentality version of fighting for democracy (ends justifies means) and entirely creepy as hell (as in: if you're ever alone in a room with one, count your money, then your organs, then check on all your family members and friends ... scary creepers, though maybe a lot of that was for effect, can't say).
Tres Chick!
In my little country (20 million voters) we also manage to use paper ballots and manual counting. Results are reliably available for most precincts within 12 hours of the polls.closing. Whats so difficult about this?
They already do. They're sending babies to court without lawyers. And keeping them in cages.
This is ... a good idea, IMO, that needs more exposure. Where are our publicists ...?
Good lord those weirdos
I have a documentary rec for you. Don't let me forget.
Diebold after waking up one morning saying "hold my beer"
The tabulator is potentially vulnerable. A verifiable paper trail is what's missing.
if you've discovered the inadequacies, imagine what a room full of 125+ IQ folks, who've been training in logic and computer systems since they were 8, and are putting in 14 hour days that are powered by gov't issued pills have found?!
the only computer system that is NOT likely of being hacked is one that is unplugged
Exactly. Mussolini came to a very ignominious end. And you are very right about this: they can only win by cheating.
Interesting, Sounds good.
In NY, we first put it through a scanner which reads the vote, they we put it in an envelope and give it to an election worker.
Some of them have been caught cheating to the point where elections were redone. This is an indication of how bad it was or else how tired someone in charge has gotten of having that taint all over their elections. Also, those voting systems that have been exposed to the internet could have the relevant bug already in place and ready to go. It's been demonstrated, on YouTube. No matter how sincere and careful the actual poll workers are, once the results get sent past the implanted bug, the intended results are all that is sent on for counting. Note - this is not just the individual machines, with this style of bug, but the collection and transmission system, IIRC. Hence, all the safeguards on the voting machines are bypassed. Paper ballots are safer, as long as you don't have the ratfuckers doing the actual counting in the districts they are after. Electronic machines? A prime ingredient in the recipe for election fraud.