In my personal life I write software for the manufacturing industry. Professionally, I am an engineer, and write code for computer-operated equipment (lathes and mills, commonly known as CNC machines.)
For a sense of scale, let me say that most CNC programs are under 250 lines of code. In addition to controlling the cutting tools, the programs will check for operator input mistakes: Tools can only be adjusted within a narrow range, anything outside that range and the machine won't run. Did the operator slow it down to check something and forget to turn it back to 100%? Machine won't run. And so on. Idiot-proofing, dimensional checks and feedback, torque monitoring, etc.
Before we even let the customer see their new machine, we have already run the machine for 8 hours of hands-off auto cycling of the program. We have also run each cutting tool through enough parts to ensure the cutting conditions are optimal. Then for the customer we run an additional hands-off production run of 8 hours or 35 pieces (whichever is greater) and then do a 100% inspection of every feature out to 5 decimal places, followed by some statistical analysis to measure capability. Once the customer is happy, we ship the machine and repeat this on their floor. Then we spend a few days going over the statistical analysis, then a week of training for their operators. Only then is it ready for producing parts that make sure your car door latches with 18lbs of force rather than 19lbs.
Oh, yeah... we provide the computer code to the customer as well, every line commented for clarity.
Doesn't it seem like voting software, which likely is thousands of lines of code, should be made open-source and go through some sort of approval process before being used for real? Isn't this software vetted or tested or examined at all?
-+Edit+- I should clarify... I am not claiming that voting software and CNC programs are similar in architecture, language, layout, complexity, or structure. My point is, if a fairly simple g-code program and its performance is vetted so thoroughly by the end user, at multiple points in its development and prove out, then why in the hell isn't the software that determines how my vote is recorded given the same level of scrutiny? I didn't realize my example was too convoluted for so many snowflakes.
Sort: Top
[–] Ma_ma_my_corona 0 points 82 points 82 points (+82|-0) ago
It functions exactally as to specifications as Per democrat and george soros giudelines
[–] RoBatten 0 points 27 points 27 points (+27|-0) ago
Right. It's a feature, not a flaw . . .
[–] GetWoke 1 point 5 points 6 points (+6|-1) ago
No snitches on glitches
Or you end up in ditches
[–] Ma_ma_my_corona 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
And turn into a seth riches
[–] Dr5trangegov 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
he can come up and visit me. we'll protect him. you, though......you will have no quarter.
[–] Sir_Ebral 2 points 5 points 7 points (+7|-2) ago
What role do the jews play in all of this?
[–] Wowbagger 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Whoever counts the votes decides the winner.
[–] Ma_ma_my_corona 2 points 2 points 4 points (+4|-2) ago
Duhhhhh george jew soros
[–] cantaloupe6 ago (edited ago)
Allegedly in PA Before the ADL claimed Trump supporters were going to storm the voting center preventing conservative ballot monitors from observing a magic million ballots handing PA to Biden. For starters.
[–] binrobinro ago
The jews aren't playing, while the rest of us are.
[–] hang_em_high 0 points 28 points 28 points (+28|-0) ago
There’s only one reason voting software isn’t open source and only one reason we don’t have voter ID.
[–] GetWoke 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
User name related
[–] hang_em_high 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
Haha. I was thinking pizzagate stuff when I made it but apparently it applies to a lot of things now.
[–] Interruptedagain 0 points 22 points 22 points (+22|-0) ago
In your real world example you are dealing with customers that have been there before and, to a degree, know what they are looking at and for.
With voting machines the customers are government bureaucrats that were affirmative action hires. They wouldn't have a clue what they were looking at. You could sell them a pile of dog shit and tell them it was roses.
[–] screamingrubberband [S] 0 points 14 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago (edited ago)
I used to believe that, but it is stunning to see the LACK of understanding in the industry lately.
And, ultimately, with voting machines, I am the customer. I should have some assurance that the software works. And, no, I don't believe the software company can provide that.
Software should be revision-controlled, on air-gapped machines, and dry-ran on-site with people who got selected for jury duty, or some similar method of randomly selecting participants for a 4-hour runoff.
Open sourced and posted dry-run results at every precinct.
Otherwise, fuck off with your "proprietary software" arguments. There's nothing "proprietary" about adding 1 to a tally.
Edit... sorry, just venting. Not at you.
[–] Interruptedagain 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
No problem. I get wound up to.
[–] buckhorn 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Yes. The source code should be owned by 'We the people' and it should run on commodity/open hardware. Any installs/updates should be subject to observation by multiple opposing parties who may video all keystrokes and hash codes and receive a copy of the deployed code for further inspection/dissemination before the admin jacks are sealed under lock and key. There's no excuse that would make closed/prorietary source code necessary at this point.
Many eyes make all bugs shallow--even if only 1% of the eyes who have access know what they're even looking at.
After every e.g., 1000 votes, a 100-sided die should be rolled. If it comes up as 1, the totals for those 1000 paper ballots must be audited/confirmed by manual count irrespective of whether there's any particular reason to be suspicious.
Scanned images of all ballots should also be made publicly available shortly after voting ends.
[–] screamingrubberband [S] 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
An additional clarification... I don't give a shit about the bureaucrats or diversity hires... I want the public at large to have open access. I want to make sure the routine that adds "one" doesn't have any conditional statements. If Sha'niqu'a is going to use the software to display a number, I want to look over the routine that handles the output and make certain it is rig-proof. If everybody can see it, then confidence in the system goes up.
Code errors are caught by people who didn't write the code... because presumably the person writing the code thought it was right, and is therefore less likely to see a mistake. So let's all see all the code, so there's no "glitches" like this. I know you can't find all the bugs, but you can sure as hell see any underhanded "stuff" if you look hard enough.
[–] cantaloupe6 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
The Chinese hardware and firmware can adjust the contents of memory.
[–] Interruptedagain ago
I'm agreeing with you on this. I'm just saying that in the system that we now have it is those retard affirmative action hires that see and approve of the code. That has got to change! We all need access to it.
[–] 26291004? 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
yeah, but that's true in the medical space. Most EHR and EMR systems are crappy from the inside, and the customers don't know any better.
HOWEVER, you don't see massive failures with mission critical medical applications anymore, post THERAC. You have errors, but not with the essential fuction of the software. Voting software does ONE THING, it should do it properly.
[–] Ozfer 0 points 14 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago (edited ago)
All the source code for casinos needs to be given to regulatory agencies and approved individually. Every single game requires source code analysis and testing. So does every machine before being allowed on a Casino floor. When in a casino each software package on the machine can be verified using signatures and hashes.
Beyond this since voting is about transparency and public elections ALL source code should be open source and inspectable by anyone. We need to prevent foreign and local interference. They also need to rule voting is not proprietary. Everyone knows how to add votes correctly and there is no trade secret.
Also no casino machine runs Bill Gates/NSA windows OS.
[–] 26291020? 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
yeah, good point. This stuff needs to be open for inspection. Same with the sotware they use to justify lockdowns
[–] It_was_the_juice 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
What software are they using to justify lockdowns? All I can tell is they use some shitty data to justify a political decision.
[–] Nekketsu ago
I wouldn't be surprised if some casinos out there use fuckin' nuclear technology to keep their money safe from someone getting the "jackpot". Anyone working in anything betting related tends to make a lot of money at the cost of their brain cells from having to deal with so many people.
[–] hollywood2020 0 points 13 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago
Great analogy, a real person with critical thinking going on here!
[–] DocterDildo 3 points 0 points 3 points (+3|-3) ago
You don't think it's a man?
[–] 26290110? 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
That was implied.
[–] RubberHead 0 points 11 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago (edited ago)
they claim it is proprietary, this is a very old argument that even went before congress with whistle blowers
[–] Sheeitpost 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago (edited ago)
Wow so they have been doing this for a while which is why there is such panic in the air. They know America knows and they were trying to do a MSM-ran coup by calling it for Biden when Trump has won the election and 70 million Trump supporters have his back.
[–] RubberHead 0 points 6 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago (edited ago)
yeah a long time... you can easily find the testimony in front of congress about it. they just dont care because of the swamp
it is how AOC and the rest of the "squad" gets reelected. they are filling seats with commies
it a break down of america, so they can push world government. how people cannot see it by now is beyond me
[–] RoBatten ago
Bullshit. Have it examined and everyone signs NDAs . . .
[–] Bobwillneverdie 0 points 8 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago (edited ago)
Ive shown this logic to liberals with an Arduino with 3 buttons, one adds a vote to A, another adds a vote to B, the third displays the votes. Then just show them how changing one or two lines, you can easily change a 5/5 vote out of 10 into a 7/3 out of 10. Then explain to them that there's no rule forcing election machines to be open source so that the people can audit for the potential fraud (or even for bugs).
Funny thing Mr. OP..... I also make CNC machines. /salute
[–] screamingrubberband [S] 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Now this is very interesting... my latest hobby, I have three Raspberry pis. /salute
Our new machine orders tanked earlier this year, so our entire company went on 2-week rotating furloughs. My first 2 weeks off, I did this.
[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
[–] prairie 0 points 8 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago
Wouldn't matter. No way to prove to each voter that the same code is running on the machine itself, and nothing extra. It always comes down to experts claiming it's secure.
The only safe voting software is pencil and paper. Optical-scan count them, and do a random sample human count check to be sure the figures aren't way off. All with observers. One election day, none of this mail-in bullshit.
[–] Jiggggg 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
Agreed. Let's just use scrantrons! Widely available and accurate and everyone knows how to use them