[–] matt ago  (edited ago)

The machine you feed your ballot into broke when I fed my ballot into it. They told me to wait for the greenlight and after 15 or 20 awkward seconds I asked, “is this normal?“ No.

All the poll workers gathered around and assured me that they’d have to do a lot of extra work and wait for specially accredited volunteers to hand count the votes.

I’m just standing there awkwardly thinking that Scantron technology has been reliable for the past three decades.

I thanked them all for volunteering and let them know that I was completely confident that things would be handled well.

Maybe it was writing in “Ted Kaczynski“ that did it. A name so offensive to the AI that it causes the local node to self destruct. /s

Seriously though, things are a little fishy, but that is kind of the norm. A lot has been written about the consequences of “noticing things.“

Edited; changed note to node

[–] blackzetsu ago 

It's pretty simple. If your code sucks you don't get paid. If their voting software sucks, they get elected

[–] Nigger_Loving_Jew ago 

Even if the voting software were open source how would you know that the binaries used in the machines was compiled form the same code?

[–] NiggadermCQ ago 

Check the defcon videos. Voting machines hacked in minutes. Sometimes by a teen.

[–] Killnigs3 ago 

10000% every step pf every process needs to be public open and auditable inc ln uding the machines the circuit boards the facilities where they are produced should also be open to audit and video surveillance. everything ahould be under watch we have the technology to make things truly transparent that we dont is proof nothing more than of fraud.

the truth fears no investigation.

[–] thebearfromstartrack ago  (edited ago)

This code was WRITTEN by INDIANS (from India), I GUARANTEE it. NO witnesses will come forward. ANY key personal already back in India are on NEW assignments with BETTER pay and of course NONDISCLOSURE agreements, except they will KILL THEIR FAMILIES in INDIA if the squeal.

[–] awildbanannaphone 1 point 0 points (+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|-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|-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.

[–] Yuke ago 

They do run tests and checks etc One Example Here, it's a little old but still could be useful - PDF WARNING a brief read of this can reveal some of the things you may be asking.

load more comments ▼ (6 remaining)