[–] awildbanannaphone 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
You aren't a programmer you work with G code... im not trying to be a giant dick here but your field and what you have typed gives me zero confidence you have basic understanding of low level machine code (as in compiler and assebly) which is where the fuckery would go around in these ballot machines.
Further assuming it is in the code is also retarded. You could design chip to switch votes at semi random intervals. My uneducated guess says its actually in the hardware, not the software.
[–] screamingrubberband [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
G code is a small part of my job.
I primarily write statistical analysis routines, gauge feedback handling, and spindle and axis drive motor load monitoring, and turn that into api calls to the machine to tweak feeds and speeds in real-time, and as well as direct manipulation of offsets. I jump back and forth between VB and C for this. As I stated, I write computer software in my personal life as well, including a small cad program for a customer that would generate g code from circles and lines, and a title that was carried by the Macininist's Ready Reference for a number of years. In my early years, I took an assembly language course on the 6809 processor, which uses a near-identical code set to the 80x86 architecture.
I'm not trying to be a giant dick, but I do know a little about the subject. Don't state your position by calling me retarded, because your discussion assumes I don't know anything and is therefore pointless in its focus. Use better rhetoric.
As I said, the magnitude is the point... a simple g code program goes through a rigorous process to ensure it does exactly what it should with no potential for deviating, and the program is not only transparent, it is documented in small words to prevent any misunderstanding from people who can't read g code.
Why is expecting anything less from voting software a bad thing?
[–] awildbanannaphone 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
first off. from your post there was no way for me to gauge that you have any experience more what you initially claimed. Hence why i called you a retard... You are correct that it should go through a rigorous UAT
With that being said. My point about this being in the hardware is still valid and thats exactly how you would get through UAT... could literally have a little MEMS device in the hardware that is turned on when in the vicinity of a certain frequency (especially something in the 5g spectrum)
But tbh they probably didnt do it that well. its was too rushed. so in this case your OG post is right and honestly i hope thats the case. because easier to catch these treasonous bastards.
[–] ReverendDobbs 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Cant blockchain be used with a printed receipt and have an option to later log on to a website and plug the receipt code info in ....that way there can be two or three counting or tallying methods running in different areas with different platforms and technologies. It would be impossible to hack all that simultaneously. (Just an ignoramus spitballn ideas here)
[–] ArielQflip 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Good idea. My spouse is a CMM programmer. Interesting. CNC use G Code correct? and CMM used X,Y,Z coordinate code.
Cut and Measure VOTING lol!
[–] screamingrubberband [S] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Actually, they are very similar... The machine moves the cutting tools to x/y/z coordinates to make a part, but most of the focus is on how fast to move or cut or spin.
CMMs move a measuring tip to specific x/y/z positions to see if the part is actually there, or how far away from 'there' it is, but they are much more delicate - the motors that control each axis don't have to drive a 40 lb tool! However, the positioning accuracy of a CMM is (should be) far more accurate than a machine tool... although in recent years the machines are getting pretty accurate, some OEMs have coolant temperature monitors and chillers so they can hold .0005mm accuracy. (Well, that's what the sales brochures claim!)
[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
[–] screamingrubberband [S] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
catch (fuckingretatrds.exception)
That just became my new favorite code snip
[–] screamingrubberband [S] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
That is a loaded question... I work for a division of a machine-tool OEM, but am not too involved in the 'normal' machine sales. Our machines have thermal expansion checks in the ballscrews, and some level of automatic backlash compensation. Both of these are in the background and are beyond what the control adjusts. Because of that, our service techs mostly replace worn-out motors and seals and boards, but will rarely also rebuild spindles and re-finish/scrape bedways.
Our division typically sells machines that are single-part specific for high-volume runs (automotive, aerospace... like that) with custom workholding and automatic offsetting from a part-specific custom in-process gage. One of our customers has seven machines in production for going on eight years, making 80-lb cast iron housings. The same 2 parts over and over and over. Our service department has been called there one time to perform a ball-bar test on each machine just as a part of the customer's preventative maintenance schedule. They were all within 5 microns except the vertical that drills the fastening holes for a bearing cap (2 per housing); it has drilled and tapped the same four holes in the same location so many times that there is a 15 micron step in the bedways near the edge of the table opposite the tool changer because the machine has NEVER traveled there.
So... almost never!
Another interesting thing to note, that when you re-setup a cnc machine to do say like 30 different jobs in a year, alot of the time when you're setting up a job you're actually basically re-certifying and telling the cnc machine where it's supposed to work anyway. I work in shop that does some very precise work, and some of the cnc machines are only starting to show their 30+ years of age because they can't get replacement parts for the things wearing out in them.
[–] 26290971? 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Yep, this sounds quite reasonable. Always wanted to see CNC type software from the inside.
Consider also medical software, software for aircraft control systems, software for nuclear power plants. Mission critical software engineering is not an old field, but it is old enough that there are plenty of successful companies out there that can write software that doesn't fail.
The moron in Imperial College who created that atrocity of a pandemic modeling system must have started up this voting software company.
How do you fuck up voting software? It's not an operating system. It should be straightforward. And how does it possibly fail in the field like that?
Smells bad.
[–] ketoll 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
I thought the Diebold machines were gone now? Are they still using those at some locations?
Remember when the DNC had their primaries and the machines fucked up the results? Why are people still this fucking stupid to vote on a computer?