So what's the name of the person/s who did not trust you? And hurt you? Regards, Danny Ching
On Oct 12, 2009, at 10:25 PM, Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> wrote: > Doubt is a big thing. > > The opposite of doubt is trust, of course. That's what is lacking in > Pinas > TRUST. I'm sad to say but it's now part of our culture. > > There's no sense of TRUST. Everyone is untrusted. Nobody trust anyone. > Cynicism is the word. And unfortunately we mix cynicism with > everything we do, > including when we develop software because it's in our culture, our > unconscious > self. We try to incorporate checks that's akin to preventing someone > trying to > cheat the system. And our system becomes too complicated and we lost > the > main objective of the system and what it is trying to accomplish. I've > seen this all. > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:50 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hello again, >> >> Yes, blackbox testing is definitely something that can be done. >> But, how can one prove that all possible outcomes have been used? >> Create a open source program that generates inputs with pre- >> computed outputs and compare them with the PCOS outputs? Pwede din. >> Then of course prove mathematically that all inputs are indeed >> generated by the open source test program. >> >> But, isn't a source review easier? >> >> Also I do find it strange that a source review is in the law. >> Bidders entered their bids with this in mind. So what's up with all >> the fuss? This just causes doubt in people's minds and doubt is bad >> especially for something as sensitive as an election. >> >> Thanks. >> "Sent via BlackBerry from Smart" >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> >> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:35:38 >> To: <[email protected]>; Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) >> Technical Discussion List<[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [plug] COMELEC SUED (Was: The Death of Election 2010 >> SourceCodeReview) >> >> We do it the way it has been done. >> >> Testing the System by Outcomes. >> >> Come up with a set of inputs, and a set of outputs. >> >> If all the outputs (maybe hundreds or thousands) agree with all the >> inputs, then that's acceptable. >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:31 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> How do you suggest we ensure that the code that is running does >>> not have the badguyvote++ sub-routine? Checking binaries using pre- >>> defined test cases will probably miss something. >>> >>> "Sent via BlackBerry from Smart" >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> >>> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:09:48 >>> To: <[email protected]>; Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) >>> Technical Discussion List<[email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: [plug] COMELEC SUED (Was: The Death of Election 2010 >>> SourceCode >>> Review) >>> >>> It's efficiency. Code source review will not get you to where you >>> want. >>> >>> It will not reach the objective of knowing whether the System is >>> right >>> in doing what it's suppose to deliver. >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:08 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> This is getting out of hand and really entertaining. >>>> >>>> But seriously, what is wrong with a source code audit and a >>>> binary integrity validation mechanism? Just to check if there is >>>> not code that says: "if candidate='good guy' then badguyvote++"? >>>> >>>> "Sent via BlackBerry from Smart" >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> >>>> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:58:59 >>>> To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion >>>> List<[email protected]> >>>> Subject: Re: [plug] COMELEC SUED (Was: The Death of Election 2010 >>>> Source >>>> Code Review) >>>> >>>> [email protected] is not even in google search. >>>> >>>> Just another one of those pretenders. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Maybe, just maybe your just one of those pretenders. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> I don't understand. Why would you ask the question? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:50 PM, Daniel Escasa <[email protected] >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>> OK, who are you, and what did you do with the Oscar Plameras who >>>>>>> posted this: >>>>>>> http://lists.slug.org.au/archives/slug/2003/08/msg00344.html >>>>>>> and this: >>>>>>> http://archives.free.net.ph/message/20090918.004218.c213bcf2.en.html >>>>>>> ? Oh, and ironically, >>>>>>> http://www.elections.act.gov.au/elections/electronicvoting.html: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <except> >>>>>>> Source code for 2008 software (zipped file in .zip format - >>>>>>> 759 kb)The >>>>>>> eVACS® source code downloadable here is an extract of th >>>>>>> e voting, data >>>>>>> entry, and counting modules as used by Elections ACT and is >>>>>>> provided >>>>>>> for study purposes only. Not included are: (a) artefacts >>>>>>> produced >>>>>>> during the eVACS® development process, such as detailed design >>>>>>> specifications; (b) the base Linux operating system and >>>>>>> configuration >>>>>>> files; (c) the scripts that are used to initialise the vote >>>>>>> databases >>>>>>> and invoke the eVACS® modules. The design information fo >>>>>>> r the eVACS® >>>>>>> system is the property of Software Improvements Pty Ltd. Their >>>>>>> website >>>>>>> is at www.softimp.com.au/. Bona fide researchers interested in >>>>>>> acquiring more of the source code may apply to Software >>>>>>> Improvements >>>>>>> using the form at: www.softimp.com.au/evacs/contactus.html >>>>>>> </excerpt> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ironic because you're in Australia. And you're even too lazy >>>>>>> to trim >>>>>>> the quotes. And if you have to ask what that's all about, I'll >>>>>>> ask >>>>>>> again: who are you and what did you do to the Oscan Plameras who >>>>>>> posted those two messages in the URLs above? >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Daniel O. Escasa >>>>>>> independent IT consultant and writer >>>>>>> contributor, Free Software Magazine (http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com >>>>>>> ) >>>>>>> personal blog at http://descasa.i.ph >>>>>>> Twitter page at http://www.twitter.com/silverlokk >>>>>>> If we choose being kind over being right, we will be right >>>>>>> every time. >>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> _________________________________________________ >>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>> _________________________________________________ >>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>> _________________________________________________ >>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>> _________________________________________________ >>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >> _________________________________________________ >> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph > _________________________________________________ > Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List > http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug > Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph _________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
