reply to post by ModernAcademia
This guy has little credibility. He's has been involved in the political process (and lost twice) and provides no substantial proof that anything
wrong was done.
He was asked to write code to change vote tabulations. OK, of course that can be done. He was never asked to place the code into production. He
had no access to the production environment, hence his exercise was proving a concept, which of course could be proven. It is just as likely that
they asked him to write the code so that they could strengthen the integrity of the system - similar to hiring a hacker to test your security.
His statements are not taken in context. He provided no context. Telling him to write code that would steal an election is not telling they wanted
to steal one, only that they wanted to check the feasibility of doing so. Again there could be multiple motivations for doing so. I agree, the
entire matter should have done far more publically, but then again, we don't know that it wasn't.
Change controls into enterprise computing environments are rigorous. They involve code reviews, separation of duties, quality assurance testing,
documentation, multiple sign-offs, code placed in code repositories in both a source and compiled state. This gent makes it sound like somebody can
cut a piece of code and populate a network with it. It is not that simple. Further the folks asking the questions likely know (or have been
briefed) that it is not that easy and thus asked partisan, leading questions, which this guy was very willing to play with. This gent talks about
the ease of writing the code, but sheds no light into how that code might get into production, actually he avoids the topic, making the matter appear
infinately simpler than it actually is. His description of the enterprise computing environment has zero credibility.
Sure there is election fraud. Illegals vote, same day registration happens so folks are able to vote at multiple polling places, dead people vote,
pressure groups on both sides look to influence the dynamics of polling places, poll workers take retarded, demented and handicapped people into
booths and pull levers for them, folks are given money and liquor to vote. The business is dirty and always has been. It is pretty certain that
Kennedy stole the election from Nixon by rigging the Chicago districts, swinging Illinois to Kennedy. Interesting that were he not to cheat on the
election there is a chance he's be alive today.
The whole business is dirty. Paper ballots are dirty and subject to abuse, electronic machines are subject to corruption. Its always going to be a
This gent did not say anything and based upon his articulation of computing principals, you'd be a fool to hire him to work on your personal website,
let alone enterprise systems.
There is only one way to ensure honest elections. Early registration with proof of citizenship. No Motor Voter. No on-line voting. Requirement to
have two people, one from each party (three if there are three candidates) and separation of duties between overseeing the actual voting process and
the tabluation of votes. No electioneering, no loitering at polling places. In large, busy polling places, police on site.
It ain't rocket science, yet our government, particularily the democrats have been pushing legislation which makes voter fraud easier. Easier to
commit, more difficult to stop.
edit on 19-4-2011 by dolphinfan because: (no reason given)