Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (85171)	11/12/2000 12:46:29 PM
From: wsringeorgia	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

The problem is that there are different types of automated counts. Here where I am in rural Georgia we have new machines that work on the "retro-reflective" photoelectric principle and a recount shold not change anything as the machine counting error is very low. Also, these machines are essentially "un-adjustable" to prevent tampering; any changes would have to be made at board level and hence detectable by later inspection and they "self-null" or "auto-zero" by by sampling the difference in the infared reflection from a printed band and a "white" unprinted area on the ballot; there is no need or provision for "gain" or "bandwidth" adjustment. The type in question in Florida is a different and MUCH OLDER type; it uses the "transmission" or "through-beam" probably visable spectrum photoelectric principle and is similar to the systems employed in banking in the 50's(remember the checks with all the tiny holes in them?) and then and later in data processing reading punch cards. These are called Holerith Card Readers and have all sorts of adjustments (multiple gain, bandwidth, ect. and mechanical sensor and lightsource allignment) which could be tampered with ( in one precinct in GA anyone with access and a screwdriver could get inside as there is no lock). What would happen is that any reduction in gain would raise the reject rate; and as these older systems are employed in mostly Gore districts any scrutiny there will raise Gores total as he is the majority candidate there. The Bush camp is frantic and for good reason; they have lost the election and they know it. Unless they can stop the hand count in those they are screwed. And it wouldn't help them to recount rural Florida where Bush is ahead; a recount there, just as here in my precinct shouldn't change anything as the error rate on these newer machines is very low. WSR

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (85171)	11/12/2000 2:25:18 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 132070

Wayne, First, we are talking about half a million votes, not six million, because the manual recount will only happen in certain counties. Second, elections follow state law, and Florida law clearly allows for manual recounts. Third, you're clearly right that the machines are impartial. But the implication that they are more accurate is not necessarily true; the machines may make certain sorts of errors while humans make different sorts of errors. The issue is not clearcut. For instance, in Massachusetts, we had an election ten or fifteen years ago where the machine was unable to count about 20% of the ballots because they had become damp on a rainy day and it was hard for the voters to punch all the way through them. That vote was decided by manual recount and punched ballots were outlawed in Massachusetts thereafter. Our elections officers are sounding quite smug about their foresight now. In fact, the issue is really debatable. The use of different ballots for different counties opened the door for individual skewing effects -- you clearly had such an effect in Palm Beach county. Also, the number of machine-uncountable ballots exceeds the margin of difference between the candidates. So what do you do? Florida law gives the choice to the county officials. By the way, do you know the name of the leading companies that make computerized voting systems? I'm serious, I want to look into investing in them. These ridiculous punch card ballots are the heart of the problem and you can bet they will be gone before the next election. Can you say "high degree of embarrassment"?

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (85171)	11/12/2000 2:46:18 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 132070

wayne, i suspect the texas law requires a hand recount of the whole state or area that decided a matter. it is ABSURD to hand recount portions of the state focused on one side of the issue. i understand 2 precincts are 9-1 gore. what about those precincts that were 9-1 bush? those votes don't count? not to democrats. las vegas is a very corrupt and ugly place in many ways. however, it IS the logical destination of capitalism given human nature. we are witnessing the las vegas of democracy. gore wins b/c he 1. understood florida law and 2. used it to his self serving advantage to manipulate a win out of florida. george bush didn't - and he MUST BE REALLY DUMB B/C HIS BROTHER IS GOVERNOR OF THE STATE! yes, al gore stole this election. but he did so legally, like taking candy from a baby.