Sorry about the mail storm. Someone at monash.edu.au has
apparently set up a mail loop that was resubmitting cpunks mails.
Eric
On Tuesday 25 November 2003 01:21 pm, Trei, Peter wrote:
[snip]
All I want is a system which is not more easily screwed around with then
paper ballots. Have some imagination - you could, for example, set things
up so the voter, and only the voter, can see the screen and/or paper
receipt while
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 03:26:18PM -0800, Tim May wrote:
(I fully support vote buying and selling, needless to say. Simple right
to make a contract.)
What's your take on this situation, then:
BOSS: Get in that booth and vote Kennedy or I'll fire you. Take this
expensive camera with
On Nov 25, 2003, at 11:21 AM, Trei, Peter wrote:
Tim May [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 25, 2003, at 9:56 AM, Sunder wrote:
Um, last I checked, phone cameras have really shitty resolution,
usually
less than 320x200. Even so, you'd need MUCH higher resolution, say
3-5Mpixels to be able
On Nov 26, 2003, at 8:10 AM, BillyGOTO wrote:
I have no problem with this free choice contract.
You can't sell your vote for the same reason that Djinni don't
grant wishes for more wishes.
A silly comment. I take it you're saying Because the rules don't allow
it. Or something similar to this.
All I want is a system which is not more easily screwed around with then
paper ballots.
I think it's called OCR.
Paper ballots, marked by the voter, not by software, then counted by
software:
- the ballot and the audit document are one and the same - no opportunity
for software to mess with
Miles Fidelman wrote:
- option for a quick and dirty recount by feeding the ballots through
a different counting machine (maybe with different software, from a
different vendor)
or indeed constructing said machines so they *assume* they will be feeding
another machine in a chain (so every party
On Wed, 26 Nov 2003, Dave Howe wrote:
Miles Fidelman wrote:
- option for a quick and dirty recount by feeding the ballots through
a different counting machine (maybe with different software, from a
different vendor)
or indeed constructing said machines so they *assume* they will be
On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 09:18:42AM -0800, Tim May wrote:
On Nov 26, 2003, at 8:10 AM, BillyGOTO wrote:
I have no problem with this free choice contract.
You can't sell your vote for the same reason that Djinni don't
grant wishes for more wishes.
A silly comment. I take it you're saying
.. delayed response
From: Peter Gutmann
Lucky Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
...
I fail to understand why VIA bothered adding AES support into the CPU. When
was AES last the bottleneck on a general-purpose CPU?
Apart from the obvious what cool thing can we fit in - - this much spare
die
Miles Fidelman wrote:
Peter Trei wrote:
All I want is a system which is not more easily screwed around with then
paper ballots.
I think it's called OCR
Actually, I think its called 'Optical Mark Sense'.
Paper ballots, marked by the voter, not by software, then counted by
software:
- the
Cameras in the voting booth? Jesus Christ, you guys are morons. If you
want to sell your vote, just vote absentee. The ward guy will even stamp
and mail it for you. Happens every election.
Doesn't make sense.
Votes are already bought and sold, but there's so many middle men taking
their cuts in the form of military bases or whatnot that the enduser barely
gets some.
-TD
From: Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: e voting (receipts, votebuying,
13 matches
Mail list logo
