Smartmatic poll machines come into question

Post Reply New Topic

Getting back to the subject of the thread: It seems there have been questions about them for quite a few years...
From 2006, "CARACAS' VIEW OF SMARTMATIC AND ITS VOTING MACHINES":

Well said.

Would you agree that one of the reasons to avoid this technology is because people can’t be sure that it can be trusted? So the very fact that all these unfalsifiable conspiracies get thrown around about voting machines is a reason to avoid using them? Nobody claims that paper ballots get hacked, or systematically switch votes, or have bugs. So the very fact that people are concerned about a company - however fair or unfair that concern may be - is a reason to get all companies out of the electoral system?

Reason enough, although no one has brought to my attention anything in the way of tampering with any such machines.

The thing is, The machines don't need to be "tampered with" in order for fraud to occur, such as:
* You could have code on the machine to "adjust" the reords as votes are cast (some were reported to have received an update the day before the election).
* You could have code on the tally devices which does the same thing.
* You could have code that is set to ignore problems\automatically accept signatures when doing automated checks, where they should instead be rejected.
* You could have data being manipulated between where votes are cast and the final destination. (There are suggestions results may have been routed to the reporting systems via other servers across the internet)
* You could have data get "lost" (as evidenced by the memory cards that had not been previously included in tallies in Georgia) - "human error", but connected to electronic systems.
* And this is just a few possibilities...

So, there does not need to be obvious "tampering" for fraud to occur on electronic systems, and (as in other forms of fraud) potentially the only way to detect it is through statistical investigation\analysis of the data recorded (both isolated, compared to similar "sets" where possible, and compared to historic records), or analysis of the equipment (and code) used.

There is nothing to prove any of this occurred (or if there is, it hasn't been publicly released yet), but by bringing "black box" systems into something like an election, you are adding many more ways for outside actors to influence events compared to the traditional "paper and pen" approach where the person completing a ballot can see what they have done, places into a box, and knows that another person will later open the box and see the paper in the same state as it was in when deposited in the box...What a user enters on a touch-screen (and sees displayed) does not neccesarily have to be the same as what they are recorded on it as having done.

New election stolen theory same as the old election stolen theory.
Does Diebold ring a bell?

Yeah because clearly these machines are never calibrated and the results are never double checked

Reality check:

NY Times article

Miami Herald article

A public-service message for all you Trumpsters out there:

:D

Malicious code is tampering. I haven't heard of any.

This is because we can serialize memory cards & any data transfers for that matter. Scanners go 'beep'. These are rudimentary machines in order to ease the process of digital security audits, not to let the robbers in.

Also, there are no robbers. Being denied a fascist utopia is a blessing in disguise for anyone dumb enough to wish for it.

Case in point, I'm an Android nut. Android is not 'black box' software, especially not as I choose to run the OS. I maintain both my own access to the hardware & Google security patches on my phone, in fact I'm updating it today. You won't see much advertising on my devices for example. You also won't see much malware or indeed, much of any 'tampering'.

Nevertheless most of the world insists on the IT security supremacy of iPhones. Do I deny this at this point? No, it is a foregone conclusion since they've been too broadly integrated into society; plainly a translucent box or a black box may contain roughly equivalent code performing 99% of the same functions day to day. In a civilized environment without a partisan format war, we can work with both.

I have been a PC user for almost 20 years & I just pitched an iPhone application to my company. Wish me luck.

Forgive them, cberg, for they know not what they say.

Not only is it apparent that many members of this website have only a rudimentary understanding of our laws and culture, but they seem to have a very weak grasp of the intricacies of our technology as well.

So let them rant, have yourself a good laugh, and then move on, because you are not going to teach them much of anything.

Verily. People who know what they are talking about can tell when they are talking to people who don't know what they are talking about. This is based on a concept called "knowing what you are talking about". OTOH, people who do not know what they are talking about, can't tell the difference between someone who is knowledgeable on a topic, and someone who is merely confidently spewing nonsense, because they don't know better, so it all sound equally plausible to the uninformed.

But then again, trumps M.O. is to sod the experts and just make stuff up and find people to agree with you. Sometimes some things are only possible in the minds of those who know not what they are speaking of, where an overabundance of imagination can fill the void absent of actual knowledge and experience.

It reminds me of the scene with Woody Allen where he's lecturing some girl at a party about the artwork of Andy Worhol, and Andy Worhol himself pops up and says "No I didn't. And you know nothing of my work."

It seems HBO had an interest in the machines earlier in the year...

Is HBO a news outlet?

Many sources just in that trailer pointed out that voting machines, as they're implemented in elections, are airgapped, they have no network connections. For that matter, obsolete computers are really quite secure in terms of how quickly people's capability to read or write old formats of storage media is usually forgotten. We were more concerned with Russian & Chinese interference prior, because Trump asked them to interfere.

Again, I do this stuff for a living & I'm just not seeing any substance to your posts man. You could probably hoard hacker goodies ever since 1999 without ever developing the capacity to put a dent in the election without working basically 24/7 at it &/or being detected. This is why hacker collectives who do wish to so influence elections are basically always nation-state funded organisations of hundreds if not tens of thousands of members. We do not believe any of them to have been successful this time & I don't really think we would care if they were.

No matter how much Putin may have wanted Trump in power four years ago, he sure as hell knows how pointlessly destructive that choice was now. If anyone hacked our elections this time, it was a foregone conclusion because we rejoined the world health organization of our own free will.



Good day sir.

Oh my such gaslighting! Bravo my good man