Surprise! MIT Study Claims Voatz E-Voting Technology Is A Security Dumpster Fire
from the we've-kinda-been-over-this dept
You'd be pretty hard pressed to find a single respected cybersecurity expert that thinks voting via smartphone is a good idea. There's just too many potential attack vectors as your voting data floats from your personal device, across the internet, and into the final tally repository. Despite this there's an endless chorus of political leaders, cities, and states who continue to insist they know better. From West Virginia to Washington State, the quest for great inclusivity in voting access often results in people ignoring these warnings in the belief that they're helping.
The West Virginia effort has been handed over to internet voting vendor Voatz, whose smartphone voting system had already been criticized for being risky and insecure. Last November, Senator Ron Wyden wrote to the Pentagon to raise concerns about Voatz’s security and to ask for a full audit of the app.
Criticism of the company grew much louder this week after MIT researchers released a paper (pdf) showing how Voatz's technology has some fairly basic problems that would let an attacker intercept votes as they’re transmitted from mobile phones to the voting company’s server -- without anybody being the wiser:
"We find that Voatz has vulnerabilities that allow different kinds of adversaries to alter, stop, or expose a user’s vote, including a sidechannel attack in which a completely passive network adversary can potentially recover a user’s secret ballot. We additionally find that Voatz has a number of privacy issues stemming from their use of third party services for crucial app functionality. Our findings serve as a concrete illustration of the common wisdom against Internet voting, and of the importance of transparency to the legitimacy of elections."
While Voatz has repeatedly complained that its blockchain technology should have protected this from happening, the researchers found said implementation wasn't actually implemented in the way the company claimed, providing no additional security protection to the vote transmissions. On top of those issues, computer science professor Alex Halderman found other issues with the certificate pinning and servers Voatz implemented:
To protect the connection, Voatz uses certificate pinning. That means the app will only trust a specific HTTPS certificate to authenticate the server. For maximal security, the app should pin to a cert that is used only on a specific well hardened server. 3/
— J. Alex Halderman (@jhalderm) February 13, 2020
The New York Times, which first reported the research, notes that a copy of the findings had already been submitted to the Department of Homeland Security and the various election officials who've signed off on the platform. Like many e-voting companies, Voatz claims transparency isn't really necessary because it utilizes an array of anonymous experts to audit the company's systems. But the findings of those audits have yet to be made public, even to the officials using the systems. See the problem yet?
Unlike voting machines used in elections, mobile voting apps like Voatz don't undergo testing and certification by the labs that test voting machines. So there is no oversight of apps like this - yet states are opting to them despite this.
— Kim Zetter (@KimZetter) February 13, 2020
For its part, Voatz's response has been to double down on its previous positions while insulting the researchers that disclosed the problem, insisting that server-side protections would thwart the theoretical attack (cybersecurity experts were quick to disagree). The company issued a blog post in which it accused the researchers (MIT's Michael Specter, James Koppel and Daniel Weitzner) of being publicity hounds and attempting to "deliberately disrupt the election process":
"It is clear that from the theoretical nature of the researchers’ approach, the lack of practical evidence backing their claims, their deliberate attempt to remain anonymous prior to publication, and their priority being to find media attention, that the researchers’ true aim is to deliberately disrupt the election process, to sow doubt in the security of our election infrastructure, and to spread fear and confusion."
When every single respected infosec researcher and journalist is telling you e-voting can't be adequately secured and your solution to that problem is flawed and will only make that problem worse, insulting and ignoring researchers isn't a great look. Compounded by the GOP's refusal to pass any election security bills of note, and you can start to see how we're just begging for problems on what could potentially someday be a catastrophic scale.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: blockchain, e-voting, mobile voting, research, security
Companies: voatz
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
hate the messenger
This is a company where the central premise of its product is security. It then decides to make personal attacks against the people who claim its product is not secure rather than trying to directly and openly address the claims. It would be insane to trust these people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: hate the messenger
the central premise of its product is security
umm...no it isn't. The central premise of their product is ease of use. They are just trying to hide the fact that it achieves this at the expense of security.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Couldn't the same be said about their security.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Do these people never watch the news? When a security researcher goes public (after likely having told you privately) about some pretty basic and glaring flaws in your process, what makes you think that insulting and corporate denying is going to make any of what they said untrue?
The impression I got was that this app is a halfassed job. What do you want to bet that if you looked real hard into that contract you would find something that wasn't on the up and up or some kind of backroom deal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
looks at the White House
No idea why they think that works...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Voatz has repeatedly complained that its blockchain technology should have protected this from happening"
Relevant: https://xkcd.com/2267/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Having votes changed midstream after the user submits is a 'feature' not a bug or a problem... How else is Voatz going to sell the election to the highest bidder?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Not the xkcd I was expecting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Yeah I saw block chain and the new one jumped to mind instead
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Thanks, beat me to posting that one specifically.
"wear gloves..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: PaulT, constantly citing a haxxored site?
Um, after that little fiasco with xkcd.com puking out the private information on 560,000 people, you leave that link here?
https://thehackernews.com/2019/09/xkcd-forum-hacked.html
"Oh, but that all got fixed and patched!"
Too late.Damage done.
These sites/companies with shit security should be fined, and citizens should be allowed to sue them individually for breach of privacy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: PaulT, constantly citing a haxxored site?
So, you're reading an article about voting hacks but choose to instead attack someone for posting an image on a site where a different part of the site with nothing to do with voting and where viewing an image posits zero danger as your sole contribution?
Whatever it takes to avoid addressing the relevant issues I guess.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: PaulT, constantly citing a haxxored site?
What do you expect from an automated reply?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT, constantly citing a haxxored site?
The sad thing is he's only playacting as such
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT, constantly citing a haxxored site?
Probably expect more than what you Anonymous Coward chat-bots puke out here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT, constantly citing a haxxored site?
How original and funny! Are you here all week?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT, constantly citing a haxxored site
Sure, why not. But what are you bringing to tide us over? This forum has only hams and flat beer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT, constantly citing a haxxored
"what are you bringing to tide us over"
Not my responsibility to ensure your happiness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: : Rogs constantly shitting the bed
Well it’s not like your gainfully employed or anything bro.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: PaulT from Gibraltar
Well, your entire shtick is right out of the Mi6?JTRIG forum derailing playbook, even if you are just one more useful idiot.
And this:
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/5303
"image: British soldiers gathered at a listening post at Spyglass, Gibraltar, looking out over the Mediterranean. The machinery of the post dominates the centre of the composition, its four cone shaped receivers facing skywards. It is incorporated on the roof of a small building made from brick and concrete. Six soldiers are standing, sitting and lying on the roof, one of the men sun- bathing. Another man sits shirtless, staring out to sea with a machine gun post beside him. In the background, another man lies back on a reclining chair, looking up at the sky with a pair of binoculars. Coils of barbed wire, orange with rust, are placed around the outpost."
You shitbags and enablers of shitbags shouldnt be so obvious here at TD.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: PaulT from Gibraltar
How does that half assed attack invalidate the fact that looking at an image on xkcd has nothing to do with a forum hack, or the fact that your pathetic attempts at distraction don't change the facts in the article?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: PaulT from Gibraltar
Me linking you to the Mi6 Gibralatar listening post/FVEYs node got under your skin didn't it?
Go ahead, get the flag brigade rolling. Maybe derail some more. But your shtick is straight out of the JTRIG/Cyber derail manual.
And whats certain, is that you, spamming TD from Spain/Gibraltar with baseline derailer type comments and the flag brigade indicates that maybe I hit a bit close to home, lol.
Keep making my case for me, seriously.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT from Gibraltar
"Me linking you to the Mi6 Gibralatar listening post/FVEYs node got under your skin didn't it?"
Not really, given that I haven't worked there for 2 years (it appears I haven't update my bio here, I'll correct that), never worked in any capacity related to military activity in my entire life and have never lived in Gibraltar. Even if your fantasies are true, they have about as much to do with me as the people who cross the border every day to work in clothes shops.
I just like calling out half-assed distraction tactics from insane liars such as yourself when I have downtime at work. Especially when it's you losing your shit because I linked to a cartoon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PaulT, Gibraltar listening post
Ahh..is this a confession then?
given that I haven't worked there(at the Mi5 Gibraltar listening post)
ROGS BINGO
And this freudenschade gold: calling out half-assed distraction tactics
Yeah, you who never address anything in the articles, ever.
I mean, feel free to keep lying, or mischaracterizing my arguments in lieu of counter-arguments, or flailing around with ad homs, and I will do the same for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: PaulT, Gibraltar listening post
"given that I haven't worked there(at the Mi5 Gibraltar listening post)"
Yeah, if you deliberately pretend I'm saying things I clearly haven't said, I'm confessing to all sorts of things.
Why is reality so hard for you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: PaulT, Gibraltar listening post
if you deliberately pretend I'm saying things I clearly haven't said
Well, in the years where you have accosted me and my posts, this is the first time I have seen even a single drip of humor out of you.
Your latent and long overdue Mitgefühl is striking.
But reality was hard for me, once, when I lived in a militarized, totalitarian/Orwellian Jewish-christian society, and it got immeasurably better when I left those societies.
Immeasurably amazing, actually.
And, better for those around me, who no longer fear being murdered in their school or workplace, every time the deep state pulls off a mass homicide in the US.
Now about your confession, lol....
Note to self:....wear gloves...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: PaulT, Gibraltar listening post
"But reality was hard for me"
Yes, life tends to be easier when you construct a fantasy world around yourself in order to deal with life. I'm happy you constructed one that keeps your outbursts to nonsensical ramblings online rather than accosting honest people in the real world..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT, Gibraltar listening post
Did you miss this, PaulT:
My life is INCREDIBLE right now, and has been since I left the western mindset, filled with semi-witless, binary thinking I/O brained, unhappy turds and curmudgeons like you, whose entire lives are lived online, when not toeing the line at some shit western IT company.
So, your projection here concerns me:
constructed [a reality] that keeps [PaulTs] outbursts to nonsensical ramblings online rather than accosting honest people in the real world
See, there you go with that ever present western dialectic black glove, the subtle threat of all dialogue online in the FVEYs militarized dialectic space:
equating being out-argued online with "that guys a terrorist, and we gotta go preemptively kill him offline before he metaphorically accosts one of us"
Bro, I haven't been accosted by anyone since I left your shit Jewish-christian countries behind. No antifa/altright/NGO/police state/K4 community policing/church sponsored bullies anywhere in sight.
And I never once-ever-took a swipe at anyone in real life who didn't literally accost me first. I am trained to be exactly that way, because its the law. You people create, and recreate ONLY violence, everywhere you go.
So, really, get out more often, and maybe, get laid once in awhile too. It does miracles for you Catholic types.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT, Gibraltar listening post
"My life is INCREDIBLE right now"
Ignorance is bliss, as they say, and certain types of brain damage are known to cause a state of euphoria.
"It does miracles for you Catholic types."
Why would you think I'm Catholic? Is this another one of your idiotic fallacies where you take generalised demographic data and try applying it to individuals without context? That's what I'd have to assume, but it's a really dumb thing to do.
I mean, even if I was Spanish, the population is only around 65% Catholic (although a much lower percentage is regularly practicing). But, you're trying to apply religious affiliation to someone who moved here from a non-Catholic country, who has been pretty outspoken here as an atheist in the past?
The fantasy version of me you keep attacking in an interesting fellow, I agree, but he's nothing like the one that exists in reality. Do you want to try debating the real one, for once, or is fantasy all you have?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT, Gibraltar listening post
Ignorance is bliss, as they say
Agreed, indeed. Tell me more about your condition, lol. But its good to know that you are an atheist. That's a win for the world.
take generalised demographic data and try applying it to individuals without context?
Yes, I and others here do this, sometimes. Sometimes for fun and sport, other times, because shitbags here did it to me first.
I do that a lot, because I am demonstrating a tactic of counter-intelligence, that is endemically flawed,and used to target THE OTHER, but used all over the world, by FVEYs governments, to target, isolate, propagandize, and harass innocent people, and in many cases, creates actual terrorists from whole cloth. I call it webterrogation, but others call it other things, in its most simple form, most commonly called psychological operations (PsyOps).
Then, re:
The fantasy version of me you keep attacking in[s] an interesting fellow
Thats gold. Very insightful.
I could equally say that of your perception of me, and I have repeatedly said that in many forms over the years tp youand others here. But I wont say that now, because this is the first time you yourself have responded in a non-hostile manner, which I appreciate.
Simply put, a long time ago, maybe five years ago, I tried to bring facts to light about CVE programs here and elsewhere.
TDs fan base-mostly techies-wasn't having it, whereas other media outlets now report it widely.
And, frequently here, we see this process in action, on a very small level, sometimes directed at me, sometimes at others, and I deliberately cranked that level up twentyone notches on multiple occasions, to learn about adversaries and adversarial processes.
Basic dialectic analysis, combined with a real belief based in evidence, that this form of othering and then, targeting is in fact a real thing online, based in keywords but also, in religious-tribal taboos about speech.
Just today, I posted about the Harvard think tank, the Humanist Chaplaincy at Harvard, and also the Broadcasting Board of Governors that runs US propaganda operations, but I have also had the Brookings and others follow me across the space-time continuum, in real time, lol.
This link just for fun( no, I make no demand that you click it, but I generally advise others to NOT click links in real-time conversations, for reasons you can probably imagine):
https://www.humanisthub.org/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Unhinged ranting of blue balls
Damn boy. You should like the textbook for paranoid schizophrenia. If you’re honestly wondering we we don’t listen to your insane ranting. It’s because your drivel reads like a really bad Tom Clancy novel. Have you considered professional treatment?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Limitations of Armchair Psychology
Well, yeah, with evidence, Seargent Peepers.
And from my armchair, you look like a Personality Disorder, likely Level -1 sex offender, and possible passive aggressive psycho-sadist.
How did I do?
Have you considered...
BLAM!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT, Gibraltar listening post
Once again, I'm glad that you choose to use this forum for your much-needed therapy instead of going out and harming people in the real world, but you should consider professional help at some point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Psychiatric Meta-narrative
PaulT, in your projection, you forgot to take your meds.
And, really, that psychiatric meta-narrative only plays in Jewish-christian societies based in binary analysis of the circular logic of Jewish -christian religion.
Lets discuss that narrative sometime, because it ONLY works online, but is useless in a court room, or non-J-c society.
I am also glad that you are here, too, PaulT, obsessing over my posts for some reason.
Your narrative is a strange analogy, considering you spent ALL of last night targeting my posts, but hey, if it kept you from self-harm, or hurting others, more power to you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT from Gibraltar
"Me linking you to the Mi6 Gibralatar listening post/FVEYs node got under your skin didn't it?"
Oh, boy, still pushing that "40% of every commenter in every forum is an intel plant" without even a casual nod towards the fact that said assumption turns the majority of the citizenry into paid alphabet soup informants by inference. I guess regular paranoia isn't enough for some people.
"Go ahead, get the flag brigade rolling. Maybe derail some more. But your shtick is straight out of the JTRIG/Cyber derail manual."
I'm curious. Since you often write like an unpleasant nitwit who is personally offensive to just about everyone how do you tell the people who flag you simply because you act like a douchebag from the presumptive people who flag you because you are somehow a "threat" to the Global Unnamed Conspiracy Which Somehow Keeps failing To Silence Loudmouthed Asshats Despite having 40% Of The Citizenry In Their Pockets?
"And whats certain, is that you, spamming TD from Spain/Gibraltar with baseline derailer type comments and the flag brigade indicates that maybe I hit a bit close to home, lol."
Question for you - do you know of ANY normal person who wouldn't respond negatively towards your usual commentary?
your world must be a very easy one. All you have to do is stand and scream offensively at people and anyone who reacts negatively you immediately jot down on the list of co-conspirators.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT from Gibraltar
Well, look above, the guy admitted it, more or less. And you brought the 40% into it here, I didn't.
And on that note, my comments, while not conforming to the usual partisan/tribalist bickering,consensus-confirming navel gaze here, I distinctly have a purpose often different than your own.
As for the 40%, yes, I did say that at one time, and sourced it somewhere in my own research, and yes, I admitted later I cannot find that source in my voluminous stacks of my own research.
So why do you even bring that up AGAIN?
And, of course, that has nothing to do with anything I said above, about VOATZ dumpster fire, because I didn't bring that up here, now, you did.
In lieu of real dialogue on that topic, you derail as usual (and curiously today, your posts and PaulT posts seem to hit send within minutes of each other).
So, for example, even if I did source the 40%, you would do what you usually do, and demand even more evidence and then, never read or engage with the evidence. I have tangled with you and other TD dialogic trip and falls on this before.
For now-since you brought it up-if you care to engage with that 40%, I am willing to source it, if you are willing to engage with that claim.
I would start with the budget of the US propaganda wing, the Board of Governors:
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Broadcasting_Board_of_Governors
And its many political and international wings and their black budgets
Maybe even examine the allegiances of the governors themselves to NGOs, and think tanks like the Brookings institute, or the Harvard Humanists and grant money aimed at narrative framing:
https://www.humanisthub.org/harvard/
Or take a look at their budget requests, which tallied 661 million for fiscal 2018-2019 alone:
https://www.bbg.gov/wp-content/media/2018/02/BBGBudget_FY19_CBJ_2-7-18_Final.pdf
And, as usual maybe examine the western dialectic itself via psychological operations and the operators behind them.
https://publicintelligence.net/nato-psyops-policy/
And, quote their purposes directly:
"role of Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) is to induce or reinforce the perceptions. attitudes and behaviour of North Atlantic Council (NAC) approved audiences "
SDM, what do you think influence is anyways? Much less what organizations finance these HUGE internet operations? And who do YOU think is commenting on technology forums, mostly? That little old lady from Pasadena?
https://www.eff.org/cases/jewel
Honestly, SDM, you want to genuinely talk about it, or just come off as another disingenuous TD timesucker working from the ritual defamation model of discourse, via your oddly placed hostility today (normally you are not so unhinged), and your even more odd claims that you are somehow not religious but ALWAYS respond in a binary, religion based manner that could only be the result of training or culture?
I mean, maybe go flag that AC that keeps calling me fat, and racist. His claims are far more easily debunked, and more worthy of your fairly keen and often witty intellect. Just because I don't have an ADL sponsored think tank up my ass doesn't indicate to rational people that I hate anyone.
Lastly, in re:
do you know of ANY normal person who wouldn't respond negatively towards your usual commentary
Normal is a BIG discussion, SDM. I thought you knew this.
In fact, normal does not mean good, decent, intelligent, or even moral, by any stretch.
You might find it interesting that I get paid to talk exactly as I do, to people who find it amazing, eye opening, and intriguing.
Equally, you might note that NONE of those better-than-average and not-at-all normal by western standards people come from western Jewish-christian societies.
So, to answer you, I know lots of think tank trained faux intellectuals, and Jesuit trained discussion derailers, and low IQ Paul Blart the mall cop types, and 'oh look I wear a beanie or a white collar' types who would put my head on a platter.
And, I wouldn't want it any other way. Like Karl Marx once said in a nod to Sam Clemens (I am paraphrasing) "I wouldn't join any club that would have me"/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT from Gibraltar
"Well, look above, the guy admitted it, more or less"
...and by "more or less", you mean "only if you deliberately misrepresent what was said". It's a neat trick, openly lying about the words in front of everyone so that you can write paragraphs of nonsense, but I do wish you've use the time and energy for something useful.
"In fact, normal does not mean good, decent, intelligent, or even moral, by any stretch."
From what I've seen, it's been a long time since you've been anywhere near "normal".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stormin Normie, aka PaulT from Gibraltar is a normie
And normal is somehow a good thing to you Paul?
Is the love and admiration of the Holy Inquisitor de Torquemada still active in your region, or did the
good, normal people like you
eradicate that stain on history?
Un-ironically, normal in your area is self flagellation, hatred of Basques and the Portuguese, and more unfortunately, borracheras drinking cheap sangria alone, instead of with a nice paella.
Normal there was once the torturing, splicing, dicing, dismemberment, and stoning abnormal heretics. As I recall, de Torquemada was...oh, never mind.
Are you also onboard with that?
Yeah. I am abnormal for a reason. You can even call me a full blown deviation if you want to, its a compliment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Stormin Normie, aka PaulT from Gibraltar is a normie
"And normal is somehow a good thing to you Paul?":
Yes, a little deviation from the norm is quite nice, even desirable, but life's hard enough without disruptive mental cases ruining it for everybody.
I'm not entirely sure that dredging up things that happened in my adoptive country hundreds of years before I made the decision to move here have to do with things, especially since I'm sure you have the same and worse that can be pointed at in your country's history. But, you will do whatever it takes to avoid a reasonable conversation, I know.
"Yeah. I am abnormal for a reason"
Indeed, I'm sure there is a diagnosable illness (and relevant treatment), but we can continue to provide the therapy you refuse to pay for here if you wish.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Stormin Normie, aka PaulT from Gibraltar is a normie
Wow...disruptive mental cases ruining it for everybody
I am sorry for whatever happened to you ok? I dont think you are crazy, per se, PaulT., just fucking retarded in the classical literal sense of "somewhat late" reasoning sense of the terms as applied toreason, and along certain named intellectual lines of theocratic reason insofar as theocracy is real, or reason itself is not theocratic.
And: adoptive country? Poor San Mao!
So, the entirety of Spain said "let me take that little bastard under our wings, and let him FLYYYYYYYY!!!!!! Like freedoms EAGLE!, or, the Virgin Mary, unfolding her gracious flappers!!!"
Or, more accurately, just another disenfranchised little bastard to be racially/ethnically exploited.
Just guessin, of course....
In my mind, I actually thought of you as a Moroccan or other brownie, caught up in whiteys game. You surprised me.
But, again, I must admonish you for your use of the collective pronoun, to whit: we can continue to provide the therapy you refuse to pay for here
Who the fuck are we in your sense of the word?
And: because you are incapable of realizing that the collective use of a pronoun, spoken as an individual relegates you to the collective dustbin of human history, extrapolated by psychological professionals is in fact delusional, as stated in their official literature thus:
https://publicintelligence.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/NATO-PSYOPS-Policy_Page_02.jpg
Oops, wrong link....
This one: https://www.theravive.com/therapedia/delusional-disorder-dsm--5-297.1-(f22)
I cannot concur, or even engage with your delusion.
And, I do not need any therapy, other than those wonderful SPA employees that China and its citizenry graciously provides to people like me.
But I appreciate the offer. Truthfully, I adore TDs shitbags, and even you, PaulT. Even YOU finally, FINALLY provide evidence of some sort, which is rare.
Very, very rare that TD commenters provide either links, or anything, really, other than snark and psychobabble.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Stormin Normie, aka PaulT from Gibraltar is a normie
It's a sad thing to see the state of mental healthcare where you are, it really is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT from Gibraltar
"As for the 40%, yes, I did say that at one time, and sourced it somewhere in my own research, and yes, I admitted later I cannot find that source in my voluminous stacks of my own research. So why do you even bring that up AGAIN?"
Because you have a lamentably recurring tendency of bringing up extraordinary claims and then scrape the bottom of the barrel for shit rhetoric when people refuse to accept that you've pinned down the axial spin coefficient of Russel's Teapot. A gentle reminder then - when you make an extraordinary claim, every sane person will immediately ask you to back it up, without any need for that person to be a derailer or the plant of some unnamed ubiquitously present intelligence agency.
"In lieu of real dialogue on that topic, you derail as usual (and curiously today, your posts and PaulT posts seem to hit send within minutes of each other). "
First PaulIT is an MI6 plant, now he's me? Is that what you imply? Or are you just shitposting yet another attempt at marginalizing anyone who dares call you out on what appears to be a very thick assortment of assumptions based on - charitably seen - paranoia?
As for derailing, I'll posit the contrary statement that you aren't holding any position to derail from - instead you are consistently being met with the exact same respect you show unto others.
The door swings both ways and you have, I'm afraid, used whatever goodwill this cynical herd of posters have to spare. And even in cases where you bring up a valid point you do so not by solid and rational argument. You get, briefly put, incoherently shouty.
"So, for example, even if I did source the 40%, you would do what you usually do, and demand even more evidence..."
Actually, if you DID bring up the 40% of online commenters being plants then I'd not ask for evidence. Not anymore than I'd ask for evidence from someone claiming the sun was square-shaped and lime green.
Here's a hint - not even the DDR, with absolute government authority and a majority of their budget spent exclusively on internal policing, ever managed to get even 1 in 10 to work even peripherally for them. 40%? That's the US government, paying over 100 million people to do a job of high-secrecy spying on their own people, with not a single one questioning the task and, most obviously, not getting paid for it.
It gets even more amusing when you mix the international nature of these forums into the mix, because suddenly we have a plot which needs to involve a similar proportion of the citizenry in the entire G20.
So when you make a claim - once - of 40% of the online commenters being plants, you have essentially made a claim so wild it requires evidence so extraordinary that proving the existence of supreme deities, unicorns, and flying saucers would be within the same range.
Let's break down your backing for this, specifically where you completely fail to calculate scale by several orders of magnitude;
661 million USD over 2 years? You have any idea how little that actually pays for?
The old joke of "20k for a hammer, 50K for a toilet seat" used to be an ironic tongue-in-cheek stab at black budgets until people started tracking government wastage. Suffice to say the entire US GNP still isn't enough to cover the outlay of hiring a 100 million people to do the job of daily shitposting...and in order to do what, exactly? Derail discussions?
You are assuming a lot of things well beyond the bounds of normal credibility. That the entire western world is governed by some sort of new world order capable of keeping 40% or more of their citizenry in literal thrall. And that they use this ability to get those 40% to shitpost and derail dissidents.
"SDM, what do you think influence is anyways? Much less what organizations finance these HUGE internet operations?"
Those "HUGE" internet operations you mention tend to end up underfunded and leaky as hell. And not a single one of them has the money - as stated earlier - to turn their splash page and public statement of intent into reality. Like the office of TIA which comes even closer to the definition of oxymoron than "CIA".
"And who do YOU think is commenting on technology forums, mostly? That little old lady from Pasadena? "
Try the technically inclined? Plenty of people whose jobs are either in technology or in fields where tech is being used. You think webpages and servers are maintained by a cadre of magical fairies for the sole purpose or providing a field where psyop agents can lurk in order to derail arguments made by...a very very few people, apparently.
Good grief.
"Honestly, SDM, you want to genuinely talk about it, or just come off as another disingenuous TD timesucker working from the ritual defamation model of discourse, via your oddly placed hostility today (normally you are not so unhinged)"
You get the response your earlier offers merit. Once you started screaming incoherent garbage over the thread my urge to meet the openly deranged with courteous debate went for better things.
"I mean, maybe go flag that AC that keeps calling me fat, and racist. His claims are far more easily debunked, and more worthy of your fairly keen and often witty intellect. "
Factual claims can be debunked. Opinions can not. For the record i often flag such opinions as well, depending on WHAT exactly they respond to. No one is interested in either side of a "debate" containing two AC's slinging nothing but ad homs.
"Normal is a BIG discussion, SDM. I thought you knew this. In fact, normal does not mean good, decent, intelligent, or even moral, by any stretch."
Then let me put it this way - few good, decent, intelligent or moral person would meet your usual diatribe on these forums with anything other than instant dismissal. Because around here extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Any invitation to discuss the axial tilt of Russel's Teapot will be met with an instant "bullshit" until evidence is delivered that said Teapot indeed exists. By and large even the few religious outliers around here still require evidence for assertions.
"You might find it interesting that I get paid to talk exactly as I do, to people who find it amazing, eye opening, and intriguing."
So does Louis CK. And depending on what his audience consists of he will bomb completely. This is a forum of hardnosed cynics who continually end up deconstructing the broken logic of lobbyist propaganda for one tech-hostile argument or another.
There are, in this world, speakers being paid and paid well to stand in front of gangs of KKK rednecks and reassure them in their roles as "chosen" in background of the tyranny of the black man and the jewish conspiracy.
There are also people being extremely well paid to stand in front of a podium and repeat an obvious lie again and again, for hours in a row, until the journalists go away. What you do for a living is only ever interesting if it becomes credible backing for an assertion within your field of expertise. And then only because your arguments in that field are coherent and factual.
"Equally, you might note that NONE of those better-than-average and not-at-all normal by western standards people come from western Jewish-christian societies."
Another line in sand, this time a bit more stale. You are making long rows of assumptions even an ancient roman augur would be hard put to match.
"I know lots of think tank trained faux intellectuals, and Jesuit trained discussion derailers, and low IQ Paul Blart the mall cop types, and 'oh look I wear a beanie or a white collar' types who would put my head on a platter."
That may be, but the issue here is your usual mode of interacting with others has a lot of people NOT falling into any of those categories immediately classifying you in a similar manner.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT from Gibraltar
Well, go on about your conspiracy theory if you wish, but heres the evidence of that time-space continuum that you reference:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200213/10232143916/surprise-mit-study-claims-voatz-e- voting-technology-is-security-dumpster-fire.shtml#c470
And this, without any subject or referential basis, just makes you look like a nut:
when you make an extraordinary claim, every sane person will immediately ask you to back it up
What claim did I make? Common courtesy at least re-states or in the very least, referencesthe claim, but you, for some reason, did not.
Thus, you look like a loon.
And, keep in mind that you, and other TD factitious disordered Aspies and other folks tried to keep this story about organized gangs of police who gang stalk individuals out of the MSM, calling it ( and me) a conspiracy theorist/theory:
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-01-14/lapd-scandal-lapd-gangs
Whats wrong with you?
Then when you make an extraordinary claim, every sane person will immediately ask you to back it up
I am not sure you are sane. You keep referencing things like God, as I pointed out elsewhere. I think you were saying "God help us."
Is that accurate?
SDM, there is NO GOD, only good people like me, who endure the slings and arrows of people like you, and later are vindicated by MSM narratives.
Then: PaulIT is an MI6 plant, now he's me
No, dont let it go to your head-you guys are NOT the same person, I swear. He/her and I have already had this conversation. I laughed, because the time zone difference he/she referenced was quaint, and outdated.
Then:
yet another attempt at marginalizing anyone who dares call you out
Now, thats paranoia, right there. Do you recall when my simple, stated purpose some three years ago was to draw attention to organized gang stalking? And to draw attention to how activists were being murdered by gangs of cops and community policing scumbecause people like you called that a conspiracy theory and tried to paint me as a Jew hating nutjob?
I might add that many have died since then, because good people like you denied the reality of this dialectic.
And as usual, I appreciate your keen humor, to whit:
Magical FAIRIES, lol. You are actually hilarious, and I read most of your stuff. But...
No, I have always been focused on how these incredibly talented individuals are silenced by the FBI NS letters, and Infragard bullying that keeps them silent. And then, theres that extra layer where you guys have no fucking idea who you are ganging up on, using the Socratic dialogue to attack what is/can be a valuable source of understanding, to whit:
how webscrubbing contributes to our lack of understanding of victims of psyops (mass shooters)
And:
suddenly we have a plot which needs to involve a similar proportion of the citizenry in the entire G20
Its not a sudden plot, per se,more like a 3500 year old plot, and its the way that western society is trying to package/re-package/brand itself for the next millenium, and I am not sure thats a worthwhile project considering many factors'too extensive to extrapolate here.
And:
I did not call the massive US/FVEYs propaganda operations plants" "(your word) aka "taxonomic representations of edible and non-edible life forms,ranging from potatoes, irises, chrysanthemums, ficus, or corn"," much less "any multicellular eukaryotic life-form characterized by (1) photosynthetic nutrition (a characteristic possessed by all plants except some parasitic plants and underground orchids), in which chemical energy is produced from water, minerals, and carbon dioxide with the aid of pigments and the radiant energy of the Sun", because those are plants.
I called them
US/FVEYs "propaganda operations that involve up to and maybe including 40% of all online comments in major and minor western media".
Or, something like that.
And:
you have essentially made a claim so wild it requires evidence so extraordinary...
This again? Wild is finding more than seven morel mushrooms grouped together at a burn site, and ten-twenty at a time is ABSURD!
Now, its YOUR TURN: Citation or GTFO!
re: not even the DDR, with absolute government authority and a majority of their budget spent exclusively on internal policing, ever managed to get even 1 in 10 to work even peripherally for them
Where did you get that 10%? And, honestly, I am not at all a fan of the gubmint as final, or ultimate authority, as we saw with WMDs.
And this:
you started screaming incoherent garbage over the thread my urge to meet the openly deranged with courteous debate went for better things
Well,I didn't start the screaming and dont forget that I was being censored here, by ADLified bots and NGO sponsored pseudo-community members That seems important though a stretch to prove beyond a reasonable doubt but worth looking at based in past practices here.
Do you not understand basic nation state consensus formation? Sure, if you want to have at it, show me your credentials, we can verify it, but based on the evidence so far my figure is not far off, and I admit, it is a rough estimate.
And this: the few religious outliers around here
Few? HAHAHA. Have a look at who the secularists among us actually are. Yep, Harvards carefully steered technology socialists and others in the so-called secular himanist folds. If you want to talk about that, yes, I can and will provide evidence
And: depending on what his audience consists of he will bomb completely
I have nothing against him, and really, again, your religious tendencies are showing. If a bunch of women were so offended by his penis that they shut up for a few decades about it, I have to question those womens sliding scales of morality. Honestly, I havent died because I have seen some dicks, and if those women are claiming that his dick nearly killed them, its only because a bunch of TD type commenters arent worth dick.
Really. Imagine ROGS suing every sag-titted babushka that ever flashed a nipple at me, or claiming twenty years from now that some woman who I negotiated some ass with violated my airspace because she queefed on my face at an inopportune moment?
Lawsuits, everywhere, for half a century.
Again, you reveal a religion-based bias against equality, and egalitarian semantics. So, VIVA Louis CK should he ever develop language skills and the necessary boldness to extricate himself from the queef laden mess that he is in right now, I encourage him.
And this:
an assertion within your field of expertise
No offense, by I once ate random bullets for a living, and none of them did I deliberately provoke. My country is just that full of bullets and I was lucky to get out alive. Thus, my expertise as such is strictly the gift of gab, never having kissed the Blarney stone, but knowing that FREE SPEECH is imperative to democracy, and socialism too.
And this: Roman augur....
I admit, I have not read or heard that since I was in my teens. I had to look it up,
I have no actual official backing right now, though I am trying to open a communications channel between the current administration and trade officials where I am now.
I will likely fail, but, oh well. It would be nice to have help, but so few of my citizenry get it (broken as they are in partisanship) that its difficult to get OTB thinkers together in any real sense.
Lastly:
I like to use the Guantanamo Detainee model in these cases where I am accused of somehow fomenting self defense against an angry mob:
Guantanamo Detainee: Please, stop sticking that tube in my ass, I just want to die here.
Patriotic American: Listen Pallie, you asked for it. STOP RESISTING life!
(sound of feeding tube, raping innocent mans anus in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba)
Then, some locker room talk about the beauty of the Lord, and maybe, a prayer between soldiers after the fact, who believe they are the better people
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT from Gibraltar
The treatment you sorely need is just a phone call away, I'm sure. What a waste of a life, having so little of value that you think this is a good way to spend the short time you have.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PaulT from Gibraltar
“I mean, maybe go flag that AC that keeps calling me fat, and racist. His claims are far more easily debunked,“
By all means bro do go on.
“You might find it interesting that I get paid to talk exactly as I do,”
People throw money away all the time bro.
“I wouldn't join any club that would have me"/s”
Except you’ve been part of our little club for five or more years and have accomplished nothing except convincing everyone here you’re exactly as stupid and crazy as you sound bro.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Internet voting cannot work
There are just too many conflicting requirements for proper voting. Most of these cannot be verified electronically.
for internet voting you can add in:
Until someone comes up with a way to meet all of these requirements, and do so in a secure manner, electronic voting will remain a disaster waiting to happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Internet voting cannot work
Until it stops waiting and does happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Internet voting cannot work
More specifically, it should be verifiable by most adults who are not mentally impaired. They shouldn't have to trust people with computer science PhD's to know it's correct. (I mean, hypothetically, if someone came up with a system that didn't cause the people with PhD's to run away screaming.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Internet voting cannot work
"More specifically, it should be verifiable by most adults who are not mentally impaired. They shouldn't have to trust people with computer science PhD's to know it's correct."
Worse.
They'd have to trust the very few people with root access to the system, and who could therefore adjust the results that the calculation was correct. Anyone with access less than that, PhD in comp sci or not, won't be able to even tell that they're looking at the real and accurate numbers.
That's why the manual paper ballot count is superior in so many ways.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Internet voting cannot work
No, there's been some really interesting theoretical work in this area, like Scantegrity. But there's always a catch, like requiring good familiarity with statistics or even fairly advanced cryptography (zero-knowledge proofs etc.). With school curriculum improvements, these could become practical systems some decades from now; currently, they sound a lot like "trust us" to the majority of people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Internet voting cannot work
"No, there's been some really interesting theoretical work in this area, like Scantegrity. But there's always a catch..."
One catch, in this case, being that the guy who has root access can easily allow anyone with a receipt to see that their vote has gone the way they expect. All he has to do is to change the calculated result. There is no realistic way anyone with lesser access would be able to audit a decently constructed skew. Push 5% of the votes across a given geographic line and gerrymandering ensures that what should have been a solid win is now a solid loss. You could even script the required amendments to produce a given result no matter which way the votes fall.
That's why e-voting can not be made accountable.
It's a shit idea from the get-go. Usable only for voting which has little real-world impact, and therefore has no real incentive for people to spend effort tampering with the process.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Award for Least Surprising Surprise
The article title is funny because it's not in the least bit surprising. Surprising would have been if it HADN'T been a dumpster fire.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Award for Least Surprising Surprise
Thanks for explaining how sarcasm works!
(It's funny because I'm not actually thanking you.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Award for Least Surprising Surprise
Yeah, for better or worse, I am happy that some waste the time to educate you, even explaining sarcasm which Paul Blarts with a median IQ even seem to understand.
Probably wasted effort, but we'll see.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Surprise! Will it make any difference? Nothing has so far.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
...Nero, Rome, small violins
Oh, all of this distrust of government!
The agencies would never engage in hacking to throw an election into the lap of its pre-selected candidate, much less impersonate a certificate.
“The [Department of Defense] does not engage in economic espionage in any domain, including cyber,” read a statement emailed to The Washington Post from an NSA spokesman, whose agency is part of the Defense Department.
https://www.cheatsheet.com/technology/heres-how-the-nsa-uses-google-to-eavesdrop.html/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
relevance?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
Whose asking?
Oh, you AGAIN.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
Your reply is neither relevant nor beneficial. I was hoping there was some connection that would be detailed, but no - its just more crapola.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
Um....certificate impersonation by the NSA et al doesn't seem relevant to you, derailing AC chatbot?
It set a new precedent of the gubmint usurping speech mechanisms via corporate collusion on eroding critical infrastructure (like, our votes).
Voatz uses certificate pinning. That means the app will only trust a specific HTTPS certificate to authenticate the server
Hey, they social engineered http into uselessness, and guess whats next?
Lets not forget that Brennans CIA hacked Congress, AC chatbot, and set bad precedent for hacking US democracy.
Voatz is itself IMHO, designed similarly to hack elections, and can easily be hacked by nation state actors, the Silicon Valley champagne set or anyone else at state and local levels so inclined to do so.
So, any app that is designed to cut into the lucrative gubmint contracting circle, much less to dive into the historically critical vote box is engineered to fail those who use it in that crucial area.
And that, simply because it is privacy itself that is under attack, and these Big Data hacks, IMHO are themselves social engineering exploits, as we see for example, with the ADL working with data, and targeting what they and some unnaccountable corporation have decided are right wing people.
But it never ends there, not by a long shot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
Lots of claims, little evidence.
The topic you seem to gravitate toward is significantly different than the one posted here, any reason for that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
Nice...from a shitbag who hasn't made a single comment on topic, ever.
BLAM!
Just do it, sis
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
"hasn't made a single comment on topic, ever"
Let me guess, you have examined each and every post I have made on this blog and come to the conclusion that not one of them is on topic. This is your claim, which lacks anything in support of same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
Um...no, not my claim at all, as the evidence clearly shows ADL styled timesucking race baiting chatbot.
But feel free to spend the rest of your day claiming...
BLAM!!!!
Selfshot. Right in the FACE.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
Oh, your language is so primitive!
Please, remember, western women have a veil over our speech! We cannot, for example, say VAGINA, without repercussions ( sound of ten thousand Jewish organizations scrambling for vaginal placemements)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_suicide_crisis_lines
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
If you are feeling suicidal you should seek professional help immediately.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
"certificate impersonation by the NSA et al doesn't seem relevant to you..."
Oh, it's relevant in so far as it impacts the security of daily operations. But alphabet soup impersonation over e-voting?
I make the assertion that the existence of e-voting itself has already shot the credibility of the outcome.
Bluntly put, worrying about whether a hypothetical agency could interfere with e-voting is already trying to rearrange the deck chairs on the titanic. No longer a relevant issue.
"Voatz is itself IMHO, designed similarly to hack elections, and can easily be hacked by nation state actors, the Silicon Valley champagne set or anyone else at state and local levels so inclined to do so."
Why?
The elections in the US are already "hacked" to the point where the only thing you introduce with yet another method would be to put your coherent hacking efforts in jeopardy. That and, of course, the risk of public exposure.
I have a better theory. Someone sold enough senators and congressmen on e-voting as something new and trendy, then backed it up with a pork barrel project in return of a promise for campaign-fund backscratching.
Hanlon's razor, once again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
None of that has to do with voter security or e-voting. Therefore, it’s completely irrelevant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ...Nero, Rome, small violins
"The agencies would never engage in hacking to throw an election into the lap of its pre-selected candidate, much less impersonate a certificate."
That sort of abuse is, for many reasons, both redundant, risky and not really feasible. Ironically the US electoral system is probably hardened against this specific vector of attack just because it's already so flawed even a cheat won't produce a predictable result.
First of all the electoral system is already a full-on carnival. After a voting district has been gerrymandered into a klein bottle the actual result will be off by a significant proportion of the tallied votes.
Secondly the candidates are always pre-vetted by the parties to ensure that whoever wins the primaries is already going to be the sock puppet of the lobby - not rarely, from both sides of the aisle in either case.
Thirdly, even after the gerrymandered votes for the sock puppet have been tallied that only sends electors to the college of electors - at which point your representation is great if you're from Florida and sucks if you're from wyoming - because you still only get two of them per state.
Fourth, The electors are chosen according to each state's preference, which can range from a strict democratic process all the way to the process of flipping a coin or holding an egg and spoon race.
Fifth, the electors then select the president and ought to go with the popular vote on this but in reality do so based on nothing but their own personal beliefs.
Hacking the voting machine would present a lot of risk for no gain, because unless you already knew the voter turnout at every step of the way you'd actually jeopardize turning a possible win into a decisive loss no matter how you skewed the numbers.
The real hazard with e-voting is that it abolishes the entire process of the ballot count audit, which is one of those few important procedures which still work well enough in the entire mess.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe it's like "chicken wyngz". Where it's spelled that way because it's not actually wing meat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There's no such thing as wing meat. Wings are just skin and bone. :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Er, let me shorten that down. It is clear... the researchers' true aim is to... sow doubt in the security of [their] election infrastructure. Because it's insecure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New voting
I propose that we abandon the pretense of each vote counting. Set up a meritocracy where only the people smart enough to hack the system get to vote, and the voting actually occurs by changing the system. Find a hack that lets you spoof 100 votes, great you just got 100 units. Find a hack that gives you raw access to un-encrypted data, you get to decide the next insert political position here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: New voting
"I propose that we abandon the pretense of each vote counting."
That ship sailed some time ago.
That would be a "meritocracy"?
No no - you get everyone to believe that Brawndo has electrolytes and that is what plants crave.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New Voting
You are hereby notified that your proposed voting system may conflict with patents and copyrights held by Wikipedia, Inc. and any attempt to move forward with such a system will result in a civil lawsuit being filed with prosecution to the fullest extent of the law to follow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: New Voting
how?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
when the page freezes while your mobile connection loads it...
when the page freezes while your mobile connection loads it and for a while you're staring at a header about "VoatzE" and there's just so much truth in that comparison between an ancient meme and the company's response to this criticism...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Republicans, being conservative and memorious beasts, have been saying forever, just have simple ballots, or, if you can't manage enough literacy, do an honest head count (surely one among you can count, at least). But no, democrats insisted on complications sure to ruin.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"democrats insisted on complications"
One party is solely responsible?
lol - sure
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Apparently you missed all of the Republicans who have voted in favor of electronic ballots and such.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
blockchain certs are hackable
"The cryptocurrency hacks driving recent headlines are usually failures at places where blockchain systems connect with the real world—for example, in software clients and third-party applications."
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610836/how-secure-is-blockchain-really/
Anyth ing that can be hacked, can and will be hacked. Its all about the endpoints. But also, all those man in the middle attacks and attack vectors that get you to your target.
Like most hacks worth executing, the attacker must have a valuable target, and few targets are more valuable than a US election.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Obvious conclusion: Voatz considers voting fraud a legitimate and necessary part of the election process.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Web Application Development Company in Toronto, Canada
A web development company does its best to figure out the current needs and preferences of people to satisfy them on their online products and solutions. We provide a wide range of services. At Mobiloitte we dig deep, understand our client’s objectives and unique business challenges to provide the best-suited web app solution. Mobiloitte is the one-stop solution and one of the best when it comes to a reliable Web Application Development Company in Toronto, Canada.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]