David wrote in message . ..
On 9 Nov 2004 15:14:21 -0800, (Terry) wrote:

David wrote in message . ..
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm

Maybe true, maybe not.
But one must remember that the "left" demanded CHANGE after the 2000
mess in FL.
I dislike all "paperless" transactions, be they fianancial or
election.
But the US public demands instant results. And no paper ballat system
can ever be fast enough.

Well that's too darn bad. Elections are too important to compromise
for the TV networks and the mindless zombies who watch them.

While I agree with you, the sheeple and the newsies are really pushing
this electronic voting exactly because paper takes "too long".
When I point out the risks of a paperless system to my friends on both
the left and the right, they all dismiss it as near paranoid ramblings
of an overly tired mind. The only people I know who are concerned are
programers. They, those on both the left and the right, are very
unhappy
about the rush to a paperless, rapid count vote. I don't understand
the
big rush. The new Presisdent doesn't take office until January. And a
delay
of a week or so is not going to end the republic. But the writing is
on the
wall, electronic voting systems are in. And I guess they are here to
stay.
Even in Washington state (or maybe Oregon) the electronic system that
they used
several years ago was found to be less then secure by it's creator,
and the
state still went on and used it, after being told of the problems.
Maybe if there is a major clitch and one state, or large city losses
all their votes, then people might want security, a valid paper trail
and be willing to wait a few days for valid results. While I suspect
that this election was pretty "clean", it is only a mater of time
unitl some smart crook figures a way to spoof the system.
Terry

we

On 11 Nov 2004 09:12:36 -0800, (Terry) wrote:


Even in Washington state (or maybe Oregon) the electronic system that
they used
several years ago was found to be less then secure by it's creator,
and the
state still went on and used it, after being told of the problems.
Maybe if there is a major clitch and one state, or large city losses
all their votes, then people might want security, a valid paper trail
and be willing to wait a few days for valid results. While I suspect
that this election was pretty "clean", it is only a mater of time
unitl some smart crook figures a way to spoof the system.
Terry

we
Oregon is 100% paper ballots and 100% by mail. It seems to work very
well. It is insane to use a system that cannot be recounted.

David wrote in message . ..
On 11 Nov 2004 09:12:36 -0800, (Terry) wrote:


Even in Washington state (or maybe Oregon) the electronic system that
they used
several years ago was found to be less then secure by it's creator,
and the
state still went on and used it, after being told of the problems.
Maybe if there is a major clitch and one state, or large city losses
all their votes, then people might want security, a valid paper trail
and be willing to wait a few days for valid results. While I suspect
that this election was pretty "clean", it is only a mater of time
unitl some smart crook figures a way to spoof the system.
Terry

we
Oregon is 100% paper ballots and 100% by mail. It seems to work very
well. It is insane to use a system that cannot be recounted.

A friend sent me this URL:
http://www.rense.com/general50/acci.htm
I am having some effect locally.
Up until now he had insisted there where no
problems. While we both agree that rense
is not the most balanced place, still, the news
is a little unnerving.
Terry