First I apologize if this has been posted as a thread before. I found the links for this when linking from one source in someone else's thread, and
realized that it may be important for it to be its own thread. The title is taken from the Daily Paul page with the same name.
In it, you'll find some docs covering the evidence, and inviting peer review from the real experts in stats/math. Something I'm not remotely cued
into is this topic but it was a great read and an eye opener.
given they can get past the security on cash machines its hardly any suprise to anyone with even the slightest IT knowledge that its possible to alter
what any voting machine can do if you have enough time to get to know it properly
paper votes with properly enforced verification of voters identity should always be the main form of voter choice
I was talking with a few other pretty smart fellas in the audio hobby (something that requires math), and one of them realized that not only is this
truly a vote flipping algorithm in action, the creator WANTED to get caught. Or rather, not the creator, but the candidate's pushers that turned it
I believe that was the intent of the program. To look out of place. A vote-flipping software could do so very subtly, or very aggressively. Just
like most things subtle, it may never be noticed. But an aggressive 1:1 software would DEFINITELY raise an eyebrow if only people would see it.
Which I think is what you see here.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.