What I do for a living

[Orrex]

I build and maintain databases to facilitate the payment of millions in dollars in fees to client of my company. Lots of databases, and they're pretty complex. Further, I have to design all of them in such a way that the least tech-savvy member of my department can use them with ease. The entire process is subject to audit, and I am held directly accountable for the accuracy of the calculations, and for the logging of data, and for ensuring that the whole system is user friendly.

A typical database is required to pull data from half a dozen sources, perform a labyrinth of computations, and format it into an eye-pleasing hardcopy. No matter how complex the underlying calculation process, every database must have an interface requiring no more user skill than point-and-click. I'm proud to say that I've achieved this, so that a process now takes under ten seconds whereas previously it would take a week or more of manual, error-prone data entry and calculation.

So if I can build dozens of hugely complex databases, all of which need to function with a margin of error equalling zero, why the hell can't a multinational tech company figure out how to program a reliable one-click-equals-one-vote system?

Or is it because I'm an incredible genius? I admit that I've suspected it for some time...

[JeffR]

1. You're a genius

This post proves it.:thumbsup:

[GregD]

2. I've been programming for over 3 decades

The more I see of the types of problems and vulnerabilities with the voting systems, the more convinced that the problems are intentional. And the notion that the spokes-bot from Diebold is now claiming that the systems are not computers is so amazing it leaves me speechless.

[Gregorian]

9. That's absolutely right.

What I find amazing is that it has gone virtually unchanged. The people have undergone a long transformation which has allowed this to happen. But it won't continue for long. It's an unstable situation. Between the media and the spin machines, they pulled it off.

There is nothing wrong with paper. And simply taking a week or two for results. Then again, there is nothing wrong with computers, if done properly.

I keep thinking of a lobster. The slowly rising temperature.

I can't believe how stupid and utterly simple and academic this whole mess were in is. Only a bunch of sleeping dingbats would let it happen. Like me. I only woke up when bush took office.

[TahitiNut]

12. The crap I've seen wouldn't qualify as a prototype by my standards.

It's not even "proof of concept" quality. It's totally disgusting. No way should such a system be cobbled together from off-the-shelf software and garbage components. Those 'systems' have a stench of corruption and totally unprofessional 'programming' by people who haven't the first ounce of software engineering expertise.

I worked in IT/MIS for over 3 decades (since 1967) in both applications and systems software. The shit they've peddled is an embarrassment - not only poorly engineered but totally unnecessary.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

17. I've been programming 25 years and I agree with you

The simpliest explanation for all this shoddy security is to make tampering easy.

A programmer might be incompetent enough to leave all these security holes in a system, but it wouldn't get past the QA department in any professionally run software company - unless it is deliberate.

[hunter]

21. Man, GregD, it's been a long, long trip down this rabbit hole.

"Would you tell me, please," said Alice, a little timidly, "why you are painting those roses?"

Short story: It is absurd to use computers to count votes like this. It makes no sense.

:wtf:

[Kutjara]

3. While I'm sure its correct that you're an incredible genius...

...I also suspect it's because you're paid to create an accurate and usable service, whereas the fine people at Diebold are tasked with ensuring that only Republican votes are counted.

[patrice]

4. You're right. I explain databased warehouse software for a living.

If the COMPLICATED systems, with layers and layers and layers of options, that I write users' manuals for can do what they do what they do accurately, what IS the problem with one-click one vote?

[AZBlue]

5. Of course you're a genius...you're a Democrat! :-)

eom

[The Deacon]

6. For The Tech-Savvy:

I built better programs than the ones we hear about back in high school on a machine powered by an Intel 4004 chip with 256 byte (that's byte, not kilobyte or megabyte) system memory, punched paper tape storage & input from two IBM TTY terminals. Are they seriously telling me they can't do better with today's technology?

[Fleshdancer]

7. I would give anything for.....

...someone like you to have complete access to their architecture so someone can fix the #$#%*&! holes in the system. Since Diebold has already been paid with taxpayer money and their systems can literally make or break Democracy, then it's only fair to open their technology for public scrutiny IMO. I doubt this will ever happen, but that's just my 2 cents on the issue. Otherwise, I would rather scrap the machines all together and kiss our Diebold "investment" goodbye.

[endarkenment]

28. Why bother?

There is absolutely no need for expensive complicated and vulnerable DRE systems when simple paper ballots suffice. Automate the counting with an opscan system (and be very wary of vulnerabilities there) but retain the simple easy to verify paper ballots as backup. My town spent no more than $20 per 'voting station' (a folding table with a cheap plastic curtain and a marker on a string.) Why exactly do we need a $5000 piece of vulnerable shit from LieBold?

[Fleshdancer]

29. That's my first choice too

I just think that since the $$ has already been spent, then Diebold needs to show us exactly what our money was spent on.

[roguenkatz]

8. You are probably a genius

but you aren't working for an evil regime looking to dupe an unsuspecting public.

"You can fool some of the people all of the time and those are the ones you want to concentrate on."

[AllexxisF1]

10. Although...

I am not a programmer I am a Network Administrator for a large company here in South Florida and before that CACI in Virginia (yea the blokes responsible for Abu-Graib). I deal along side talented programmers day in and day out and it boggles my mind that they say IT'S SOOOOOOOO HARD to create a simple appliance to take 1 vote, tabulate it and print it.

Good God what a load of horse cookies.

[rock]

11. Apparently you don't appreciate the degree

of difficulty involved in getting a computer to add 1 to a counter (yeah sarcasm)

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

18. X +=1;

Very, very difficut:sarcasm:

Edited for stupid typo.

[smoogatz]

13. Simple answers to simple questions:

Q: "So if I can build dozens of hugely complex databases, all of which need to function with a margin of error equalling zero, why the hell can't a multinational tech company figure out how to program a reliable one-click-equals-one-vote system?"

A: Because that's not what they're getting paid to do.

[byronius]

14. Why Do You Hate America?

I program in VBA, and have designed a full-blown application in Access 2003 to modernize my company. The functionality is breathtaking. The propensity for misuse is stunning. I can do anything with this code, I think, at times.

Anything at all.

[in_cog_ni_to]

15. Because they don't want to. Their plan has ALWAYS been to steal elections

with these machines. In 2000, 2002, and 2004 their thefts worked because WE were the only people screaming about the machines. Now? The MSM has caught on and it will be a BIG, HUGE mistake to steal this election. EVERYONE is onto their SCAM.

[Orrex]

23. Adrian Veidt in Alan Moore's "The Watchmen"

He built a teleportation machine as part of a back-handed save-the-world scheme. When someone pointed out that teleportation doesn't work because the teleported object explodes on arrival, Veidt said (paraphrase): "It works perfectly, provided that you want the object to explode."

The same is obviously true of Diebold. It is impossible that they have been unable to create a secure, reliable machine, so it must be the case that the machines' myriad shortcomings are deliberate.

[in_cog_ni_to]

25. Exactly. n/t

[shadowknows69]

16. I know almost absolutely zero about programming

and I'll bet I could write a basic program that tallies votes better.

[undeterred]

19. I am on the networking/computer support side of things

and I maintain a SQL 2000 server and dabble in databases. I don't know much programming. But I think that I could hack into these machines given the opportunity, and I could also secure them better given the opportunity. But it all starts with custody of the machines and physical security, which is apparently the biggest part of the problem.

[Tigress DEM]

20. Did you vote yet?

Just asking cause I don't see an I voted avatar on you post.

Oh and why can't they build a simple voting machine? Because they are more caught up in building machines that can cheat and supply the people paying for the service a scapegoat so they can win elections illegally.

The next project is a toaster that can dance.

You may be a genius.

[Orrex]

22. Oh, why bother--my vote won't count anyway.

Just kidding! My wife and I are voting tonight when I get home from work. Thereafter I'll update my avatar, provided I can muscle through the DU traffic, of course!

Fantastic sig-graphic, by the way!

[YOY]

24. Perhaps they have the top heavy structure that many large corporations

suffer from these days: top heavy with too many PMs and too few 'doers'. Bottlenecks and too much executive input in such projects can lead to a simple project that leads into massively altered applications that have so many variables that often the end product is buggy.

I have a feeling a large problem of their compilation is due to the multiple inputs. Then again, I've seen large data collections via a kiosk system that has been pulled off with relatively few problems.

So basically yes, they are incompetent and yes, you are a smartie pants.

[karlrschneider]

26. It does really make you wonder, doesn't it? In the mid 1970s I

got a job with a little company that 'made' computers using components from various mfgrs based on
an Eclipse "mini" with a whole 16K memory and a hard drive the size of a washing machine that held 2
10meg disks. At the time I knew next to nothing about computers or software...after getting some
experiece I went to work for one of the company's customers who had one of the systems but didn't
work very well, performance-wise. It had a Fortran compiler on it so I taught myself to write code
and made lots of programs to do different things including a payroll package for 300 employees. It
-had- to be right, calculating withholding and the whole enchilada. It was around 2500 (some long)
lines of code. Not to brag but if a beginner like me could do that, it seems absurd that a
'professional' programmer can't deal with a simple vote count. Unless, of course, they weren't
actually asked to do only that...:eyes:

[ArmchairMeme]

27. Help understanding HAVAR

When I read that the central tabulator computer had both the software for PC Anywhere and MS Access on it my level of suspicion jumped.

PC Anywhere is used for remote access by another computer and MS Access is a database creation/modifier software. It would seem that neither of these programs would be needed.

Programmer/Network guys your thoughts please.

[BuyingThyme]

30. So, your code is not a big secret?

It's all about the secret code, I guess.

[eridani]

31. No, it's because your systems get tested--

--by being banged hard and frequently against reality. We don't vote often enough to do that with electronic machines. Think how badly cars would suck if nobody ever drove them except for a couple of hours twice a year.

[lapfog_1]

32. I design and architect the file systems that likely hold your

database (that is, if you use Linux or Unix based storage systems).

And, no, it wouldn't be that hard. Touchscreens themselves are a pain because the input technology was never ever very good to begin with. Contrast a touchscreen to a keyboard/mouse combo. the only thing worse (given present day technology) would likely be voice input. But after you get away from the hardware limitations, the rest of the problem (storing votes, counting votes) is something anyone could put together. The max number of votes in the entire US is only what, 200 million? That's not even a large database for one laptop, even if you stored information about each voter (which you wouldn't).

I have no idea what Diebold and the others are doing. It's doesn't matter. I hate the very concept of computer voting because I know how easy it would be to hack it, and hack it in ways that are completely untraceable, even if someone is sure that the hacking is occurring and tries to do some forensic investigation. It simply can't be helped.

Given that most elections only a fraction of eligible voters vote, I think we are looking at 100M votes in the entire US... maybe 120M. Surely we can give people paper ballots and hand count the paper. I know, not sexy, very low tech... you might not know the outcome for a day or so... and it can (shock) still be hacked. But it's harder to hack the country or even a state, and if hacking is suspected, it's much harder to cover up. Plus computer hacking might involve 1 or 2 or a handful of people... whereas paper hacking would need 1 or 2 per voting location.

Anyway...