[–] 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)
[–] ReverendDobbs 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
All burocrats should have to go through a test to make it into office. I recommend a bullet to the head. If they live they can have the position. So far the only legitimate politician is kathy giffords.
[–] Germ22 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
you should post stuff about your work to v/machinists
[–] screamingrubberband [S] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Hmmm... did not know that existed!
[–] ChickenDeath 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
What is the biggest possible fuckup in coding that you could do to cause damage? Just curious cause I onced fucked up loading something on the cnc and it almost used the wrong tool for a function or something I dont remember but I got in shit.
[–] screamingrubberband [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I will have to get back with you on that... There are so many examples! I usually will have more safety checks in a program than actual moves, but only because I've seen (and done) some pretty impressive screwups. Everything from a supervisor completely doused in high-pressure cutting oil from a gun drill (I still laugh my ass off whenever I remember that one!) to massively wrecking a 108" dual-column VTL that had just been rebuilt and upgraded to a custom-installed Fanuc system.
[–] AngelofDeath 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
With voting machines, you're dealing with a network of computers that ultimately talk to an outside the loop of voting machines computer, which then displays totals. Many access points to alter things. The very scanner scanning the printed version can be manipulated.
THINK BIGGER. The system is designed to fail. Now, be aware, it may not be those for Biden doing this shit, but TRUMP to justify taking other steps like military intervention. Or it could simply be the cabal simply attempting to get the white man to react violently to then justify attacking the white man. I mean they deliberately stand by as the niggers burn cities down. They stand by as antifa Jews destroy statues. WAITING FOR THE WHITE MAN TO SHOOT ONE IS ALL THEY'RE AFTER, perhaps.
[–] Hand_of_Node ago
It's the system preferred by the cabal. Imagine any of our other systems working this poorly.
[–] screamingrubberband [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
With voting machines, you're dealing with a network of computers that ultimately talk to an outside the loop of voting machines computer, which then displays totals. Many access points to alter things. The very scanner scanning the printed version can be manipulated.
You are correct.
And that is a problem.
Networked
Why? Why does a machine that is counting things need to be networked to a different machine that is counting different things? The counts should be isolated from each other. That guy's vote went into that machine, my vote went into this machine. Why do the machines need to talk to each other?
that ultimately talk to an outside the loop of voting machines computer
Again, why? Why does the computer in the gymnasium/church/office building that counts things, need to talk to anything 'outside the loop?' It is demonstrably insecure regardless of the communication protocols used. Print the results, print a hash of the results database, deliver the machine and the printout to the BOE.
Many access points to alter things.
Why let them exist at all?
The very scanner scanning the printed version can be manipulated.
Then obviously that is a problem that should nullify that piece of equipment.
[–] AngelofDeath 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I still amazed at your 250 lines of code for CNC. I would love to see it. What language?
I'm old and haven't done any coding for decades, but used to do Assembly Level, Pascal, Fortran, Cobol, a little C and C+. Some of the coding I wrote was many thousands of lines.
[–] peacegnome 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
You would be a big fan of Bev Harris; she's been at this for many years.
I think that we should popularize an open source project for voting and have it be able to be deployed by a normal IT staff from a county (or a contractor if they don't have staff). If a county or state would like to use it then it would be free, and if it was even slightly popular then we could fund audits.
Right now everything is proprietary and when we have glimpsed what is going on it is always bad.
Also, it is 2020, we could easily do paper ballots, in person, with id, with complete chain of custody; then scan these ballots and put the scans online (torrent per county or precinct, or just aws, it wouldn't cost much), then the data people of the world could process them and find problems. Right now we get these blips of data with nothing backing them like "biden gains 140000, trump gains nothing, no comments attached for this delta", and until there is a recount even the party reps can't see what happened. They are obviously hiding something, this is how someone cheating acts. And really it should be a zero trust process, treating vote counting as anything else is ignorant and irrational.
[–] Hand_of_Node ago
treating vote counting as anything else is ignorant and irrational.
I'm going to argue that this is incorrect on two counts. Firstly, we don't treat vote counting as anything else, which is the problem. Secondly, the implication that a cheat-friendly system is irrational is the opposite of reality. When the winners gain the ability to literally control the lives of the losers, and the larger number is the only criteria that matters, ensuring your sides ability to "think outside the box" (cheat) is very rational in a society composed of cultures and races at war.
You're correct about how to make the ballots more secure, and the count more accurate, but that is clearly not what the actual owners of the United States want.
A popular meme account on one of the chans said "It's all a show. You're watching a movie."
The cult followers interpreted it as intended, to only apply to a specific instance, but it was the literal truth about the operation of what we perceive as 'our society'. Few enjoy the idea of essentially being cattle on a feedlot, or even in a pasture with real grass, so the vast majority of us cattle focus instead on the minutiae of everyday life. How to make the distribution of hay more fair. Who gets milked first. Whether the electricity powering the milking machines comes from sustainable sources...
[–] Amerikaner 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
As a software engineer I’m sure you’re aware of the verification and validation process, and how it’s applied to software development. With something as quantifiable during testing as the number of correct vs incorrect votes, it’s inconceivable that this is not intentional.
[–] lipids 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
No wonder those machines are so damn expensive.
Since you would know, how long between recertifications? I'm sure their tolerances aren't perfect forever.
[–] bbqchipz ago (edited ago)
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.
[–] 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!
[–] lipids ago
Thanks for the reply. Interesting stuff.