jwashburn at whittmanhart.com
Fri Nov 21 14:07:56 PST 2003
I agree. The paper printout may be unconnected to fraudulent tally
numbers produced later for publication. This is better than the literal
nothing produced at present.
There is a small chance many voters could use there receipts to counter
fraudulent tally in low-vote ward.
From: Roy M. Silvernail [mailto:roy at rant-central.com]
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 12:12 PM
To: cypherpunks at lne.com
Subject: Re: e voting
On Friday 21 November 2003 12:19, Tim May wrote:
> On Nov 21, 2003, at 8:16 AM, Major Variola (ret.) wrote:
> > Secretary of State Kevin Shelley is expected to announce today that
> > of 2006, all electronic voting machines in California must be able
> > produce a paper printout that voters can check to make sure their
> > are properly recorded.
> > coll=la-headlines-california
> Without the ability to (untraceably, unlinkably, of course) verify
> this vote is "in the vote total," and that no votes other than those
> who actually voted, are in the vote total, this is all meaningless.
Quite true. But given the fact that we don't have that ability *now*,
exactly is the difference? Other than streamlining and centralizing the
present distributed corruption?
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy