On 11/23/16, Bernard Robertson-Dunn <[email protected]> wrote: > Computer scientists urge Clinton campaign to challenge election results > By Dan Merica, CNN > November 23, 2016 > http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/22/politics/hillary-clinton-challenge-results/index.html
Old Man Yells at Cloud http://www.irkitated.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/old-man-yells-at-cloud-simpsons.jpg In related news: The Department of Justice is not going to conduct an investigation due to your phoned-in outrage https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/11/22/the-department-of-justice-is-not-going-to-conduct-a-vote-audit-based-on-your-phoned-in-outrage/ FC PS: That is exactly the problem with anything based on software. The malware/tampered firmware machines could have simply reverted back to the original firmware 2 seconds after delivering the tampered data == no evidence of wrongdoing, all checksums match on the software... PS2: recently I saw someone on a DIY PCB (printed circuit boards) telling how he once worked for a firm that "for legal reasons" (sic) had hiim replicate the PCB color (browinsh laminate) as used in 1970s gambling machines circuit boards "down to the capacitor colors and some markings on the PCBs". It was clear that this was to deceive some kind of inspection ... meaning a human looking at the board and deciding the board was the original one which has not been tampered ... If that's been happening with gambling machines, where the incentive (for the owner) is making money, why not for elections to decide our leaders to the higgest bidder? _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
