Digital Rights Management > Nova Content
Applied Optoelectronics, Inc. (AAOI), a pioneering force in fiber-optic access network solutions, has initiated legal proceedings against... Read More »
Digital piracy is a serious threat to the intellectual property rights of content creators and businesses. With the rise of the internet... Read More »
It's a wired, connected and integrated world in the 21st Century, but not for everyone. A recent FCC study found that 19 million Americans have no access to... Read More »
The entertainment industry would probably push a button to get rid of the Internet if it could. Every year, piracy grows. Every year, the entertainment industry shows ... Read More »
Internet denizens tittered a bit last week as online retailer Kogan instituted a so-called “browser tax.” The tax (which is, of course, not an actual tax... Read More »
IPv6 is here. Well, it has been for 16 years now, but aptly enough, World IPv6 Day is all about its coming of age. No candles or shoe ceremonies at this event, simply ... Read More »
Google co-founder Sergey Brin believes there is a rising threat to the Internet the likes of which the world has not seen before. It just so happens that the biggest... Read More »
Data Link Solutions (DLS), a joint venture of Rockwell Collins and BAE Systems, has been awarded a $5.5 million contract to provide Multifunctional... Read More »
The Rockwell Collins RT-1939 ARC-210 fifth generation radio is the first airborne software defined radio to be fully certified and fielded with modernized... Read More »
The last 20 years have seen unprecedented advances in the realm of computer science and engineering. One area that remains remarkably traditional, however, is voting.
... Read More »
Comments
Nicholas PellI'm sort of confused by this response. My intention in writing this piece was to present a balanced account of the issues surrounding electronic vs. paper ballots. To that end, I even included innovations suggested by Dr. Mercuri regarding how to improve paper balloting. I further drew attention to present challenges in the field.
While I wholeheartedly agree that there are difficult challenges ensuring both transparency and accountability with regard to electronic voting, I find it hard to believe that such challenges are insurmountable. In fairness, Dr. Mercuri knows more about this than I do, but then again, so does Mr. Wallach.
As I expressed privately in an email, I find it very hard to believe that anyone would come out of this thinking electronic voting is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Little content seems to indicate that present technologies are up to the task. Indeed, if anything, I think this article presents electronic voting as a sort of boondoggle -- taxpayers are overcharged for ineffective services that don't deliver what they promise.
I am, of course, always unhappy when an interview subject is displeased with an article. In this case, however, I'm not clear on what I could have done to please Dr. Mercuri, short of trashing the entire concept of electronic voting in toto.
While I wholeheartedly agree that there are difficult challenges ensuring both transparency and accountability with regard to electronic voting, I find it hard to believe that such challenges are insurmountable. In fairness, Dr. Mercuri knows more about this than I do, but then again, so does Mr. Wallach.
As I expressed privately in an email, I find it very hard to believe that anyone would come out of this thinking electronic voting is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Little content seems to indicate that present technologies are up to the task. Indeed, if anything, I think this article presents electronic voting as a sort of boondoggle -- taxpayers are overcharged for ineffective services that don't deliver what they promise.
I am, of course, always unhappy when an interview subject is displeased with an article. In this case, however, I'm not clear on what I could have done to please Dr. Mercuri, short of trashing the entire concept of electronic voting in toto.
Jan 10, 2012
RT MercuriWow, what an amazingly incorrect piece!
Electronic voting machines are considerably MORE difficult to audit than traditional methods, since they can be programmed to delete their own code so that it is very hard (if not impossible) to catch if they are cheating.
There is absolutely nothing simple in the design of a microprocessor-based system with millions of transistors. Dan's example of the older microprocessors as somehow obsolete is incorrect -- the less complicated devices have stood the test of time (we call it "debugged") and offer FEWER features that can be exploited to insert back-door attacks into the system.
Larger ballots INCREASE both programming, setup, and pre-election testing costs on computers, as well as increase complexity in checking for correctness.
It has been proven that ballot tracking using computers can be thwarted and spoofed -- what does it mater if the ballot is tracked if it is recorded incorrectly by the computer to begin with? -- so this is a false assurance.
The same is true about multiple voting machines keeping copies -- computer scientists call this GIGO -- garbage in, garbage out -- if the ballot is incorrectly recorded on one machine it will be replicated with the same incorrectness on multiple others.
What is actually obsolete, is the idea that self-auditing electronic voting systems are somehow secure or an improvement over paper-based methods. Heck, even Homer Simpson experienced a "vote flip" -- press for one candidate, the machine records your vote for someone else. This is no joke, it does happen. We even have a video showing machines being tested in a Pennsylvania certification where the vote flipped right before the eyes of the examiner -- guess what, the machines were passed and allowed to be purchased!
And as for those talking voting machines -- well we've seen those do an audio vote flip too -- say one thing, record another (happens for the foreign language ballots as well). Unfortunately, the voter doesn't know it's happening.
I continue to fail to understand how presumably intelligent people are able to convince themselves that somehow the computer, with all of its known complexity and flaws and viruses and glitches, is in any way capable of providing the transparency and independent auditability that is required for government elections. Perhaps it is because voting is really a religion, so faith-based electronic solutions will continue to be promoted, and writers will be hypnotized into spreading the fantasy that a new crop of devices, just around the corner, somehow will really will work as advertised. Dream on.
I'm looking forward to reading Nicholas Pell's article on global warming.
R. Mercuri
Electronic voting machines are considerably MORE difficult to audit than traditional methods, since they can be programmed to delete their own code so that it is very hard (if not impossible) to catch if they are cheating.
There is absolutely nothing simple in the design of a microprocessor-based system with millions of transistors. Dan's example of the older microprocessors as somehow obsolete is incorrect -- the less complicated devices have stood the test of time (we call it "debugged") and offer FEWER features that can be exploited to insert back-door attacks into the system.
Larger ballots INCREASE both programming, setup, and pre-election testing costs on computers, as well as increase complexity in checking for correctness.
It has been proven that ballot tracking using computers can be thwarted and spoofed -- what does it mater if the ballot is tracked if it is recorded incorrectly by the computer to begin with? -- so this is a false assurance.
The same is true about multiple voting machines keeping copies -- computer scientists call this GIGO -- garbage in, garbage out -- if the ballot is incorrectly recorded on one machine it will be replicated with the same incorrectness on multiple others.
What is actually obsolete, is the idea that self-auditing electronic voting systems are somehow secure or an improvement over paper-based methods. Heck, even Homer Simpson experienced a "vote flip" -- press for one candidate, the machine records your vote for someone else. This is no joke, it does happen. We even have a video showing machines being tested in a Pennsylvania certification where the vote flipped right before the eyes of the examiner -- guess what, the machines were passed and allowed to be purchased!
And as for those talking voting machines -- well we've seen those do an audio vote flip too -- say one thing, record another (happens for the foreign language ballots as well). Unfortunately, the voter doesn't know it's happening.
I continue to fail to understand how presumably intelligent people are able to convince themselves that somehow the computer, with all of its known complexity and flaws and viruses and glitches, is in any way capable of providing the transparency and independent auditability that is required for government elections. Perhaps it is because voting is really a religion, so faith-based electronic solutions will continue to be promoted, and writers will be hypnotized into spreading the fantasy that a new crop of devices, just around the corner, somehow will really will work as advertised. Dream on.
I'm looking forward to reading Nicholas Pell's article on global warming.
R. Mercuri
Jan 10, 2012
I grew up as an avid book reader and frequent patron of my school or local library. Public libraries provided the wonderful service of loaning books for free. Yet, in ... Read More »
Comments
Derry Smithone solution could be to re-introduce the concept of DRM and disable the content when the lending period expires for the lender's reading device
Oct 20, 2011
In this day and age, the growing trend towards technology seems to be an undeniable recognition amongst the intelligent collective that something curiously... Read More »
Comments
John HarvardsonFar out! I can see visions becoming a reality. This is one more step into the future and travel heading to the outer limits.
Jul 26, 2011
Gena Patent3D printing technology is an exciting new reality that also brings with it the near-limitless potential for patent infringement. We have yet to see whether various product manufacturers will, as a result, imitate the music industry and sue end users, or will decide to pursue the printer manufacturers instead. As various forms of 3D technology increase in popularity, we're certain to see more 3D patent litigation.http://www.generalpatent.com/blog/
Jul 26, 2011
On 23rd June 2011, Microsoft obtained a patent in U.S. titled ‘Legal Intercept’ which is claimed to be capable of spying over the internet... Read More »
The initial purpose of a domain name was to provide an address for computers on the Internet. Just like we have postal addresses for buildings in the... Read More »
As is commonly known, the internet has revolutionized the neo-age to a great extent. And in the past age, one company that touched the lives of probably every person... Read More »
The Birth of ICANN
The Domain Name System (DNS) allows users to navigate the Internet. Until 1998, the DNS was administered by the Internet Assigned Numbers... Read More »