[Tfug] Quick question about Python...

[Rich]

On May 11, 2008, at 9:40 pm, David Cowell wrote:

> I imagine that "optical scanning" is not what most of the rest of the
> world uses.

Unless of course you mean their optical scanners are built into their  
heads. Weirdos.

Last time I voted in England, I put the requisite number of Xs on a  
piece of paper. Thanks to the debacle over here four and eight years  
ago, electronic voting has been fingered for untrustworthiness in the  
rest of the world. Instead of this attitude of "Look! Progress!"

> It seems that the low-tech solution that was used until voting  
> machines
> came around (the "hand count" of ballots in front of two people) is at
> least as reliable as any doctorable machine method.

AND FASTER! Have you seen them counting? Sheesh! They really go at it.

> Why *don't* we use
> it? Do we really trust techno solutions more than we trust people?

Apples and oranges. Trusting a few thousand vote counters is less  
prone to risk than trusting a couple of organizations, because of the  
built-in redundancy. Whereas a single disgruntled (or, for that  
matter, gruntled) employee of the technology company can produce  
skewed results for every voting district.

Is saving a few $$$ worth the risk of a flawed third-world-style  
election every two years? Conversely, is it worth spending a few more  
$$$ to have the reliable, trustworthy elections expected of the most  
powerful nation on earth?

But then, considering the Bargain Basement taxes we pay here, it's no  
surprise the gubment is Bargain Basement quality.

Rich.



> David
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tucson Free Unix Group - tfug at tfug.org
> Subscription Options:
> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org