• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Would you use an ATM that didn't give a receipt?

techs

Lifer
Would you use an ATM that didn't give a receipt?
And in case of dispute there would be no way to verify who was right.

So why would you use a voting machine that doesn't give a receipt or have a way to verify your vote was counted accurately?

Just curious.
 
I don't keep the receipt and I doubt most people do either.
Not a great anology.

But a paper trail is a good thing.
 
The problem remains though - the machines themselves aren't secure. The group at Princeton that hacked a voting machine were able to make it so that the machine's own self-diagnostics reported that everything was running normally. Wouldn't it also be possible to plant a virus that'd print out an accurate receipt while incrementing the vote for the wrong candidate? The source code should be released, revised, and the machines should then be tested at random to ensure that they are in fact using the revised code.
 
Originally posted by: techs
Would you use an ATM that didn't give a receipt?
And in case of dispute there would be no way to verify who was right.

So why would you use a voting machine that doesn't give a receipt or have a way to verify your vote was counted accurately?

Just curious.

I always select the "No receipt" option at the ATM
Bad comparison
 
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
I always select the "No receipt" option at the ATM
Bad comparison
Why is it a bad comparison? Diebold makes ATM machines. 😉

EDIT: Also, its you who make the choice to not print out the reciept.
 
Originally posted by: RichardE
My Atm withdrawl will not decide my life for the next 4 years.

My vote could.

next

And if you're halfway intelligent you would still refuse to use an ATM that was incapable of printing a receipt at all, even if you declined to have it actually print one most of the time.

The analogy actually holds up pretty well.
 
which begs the question:

do you trust your state and local officials that they will be honest and forthright in the handling and care of your precious vote? the vote that, for alot of us, is the only way we have to influence how our government is run?
 
Robert Kennedy - "Will the Next Election Be Hacked?", Rolling Stone
"...to speed deployment of the new machines, Cox quietly signed an agreement with Diebold that effectively privatized Georgia's entire electoral system. The company was authorized to put together ballots, program machines and train poll workers across the state - all without any official supervision. "We ran the election," says Hood. "We had 356 people that Diebold brought into the state. Diebold opened and closed the polls and tabulated the votes. Diebold convinced Cox that it would be best if the company ran everything due to the time constraints, and in the interest of a trouble-free election, she let us do it."

"Diebold employees altered software in some 5,000 machines in DeKalb and Fulton counties - the state's largest Democratic strongholds. To avoid detection, Hood and others on his team entered warehouses early in the morning. "We went in at 7:30 a.m. and were out by 11," Hood says. "There was a universal key to unlock the machines, and it's easy to get access. The machines in the warehouses were unlocked. We had control of everything. The state gave us the keys to the castle, so to speak, and they stayed out of our way." Hood personally patched fifty-six machines and witnessed the patch being applied to more than 1,200 others.

"The patch comes on a memory card that is inserted into a machine. Eventually, all the memory cards end up on a server that tabulates the votes - where the patch can be programmed to alter the outcome of an election. "There could be a hidden program on a memory card that adjusts everything to the preferred election results," Hood says. "Your program says, 'I want my candidate to stay ahead by three or four percent or whatever.' Those programs can include a built-in delete that erases itself after it's done."

"It is impossible to know whether the machines were rigged to alter the election in Georgia: Diebold's machines provided no paper trail, making a recount impossible. "
 
Many ATM machines in Europe don't give out receipts. Never felt paranoid about that, but still I always check my balances online every day. I never use money changers when I travl,l ATM is the king - better rates and much easier. A few drawbacks can be solved with some foreplanning.
 
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: RichardE
My Atm withdrawl will not decide my life for the next 4 years.

My vote could.

next

And if you're halfway intelligent you would still refuse to use an ATM that was incapable of printing a receipt at all, even if you declined to have it actually print one most of the time.

The analogy actually holds up pretty well.

No, it doesn't.

A better analogy would be would you accept a contract without a copy of it, or without being able to sign it, yet still have it be legally binding. The only hope you have it is what you want is what you said it was what you wanted it to be.

That is what you are doing with those voting machines.
 
The *point* of the OP is that w/o a receipt or paper trail, the accuracy of votes can not be verified, nor can they be recounted.
All financial transactions have a paper trail.
Is voting less important?
 
Originally posted by: Jeff7
The problem remains though - the machines themselves aren't secure. The group at Princeton that hacked a voting machine were able to make it so that the machine's own self-diagnostics reported that everything was running normally. Wouldn't it also be possible to plant a virus that'd print out an accurate receipt while incrementing the vote for the wrong candidate? The source code should be released, revised, and the machines should then be tested at random to ensure that they are in fact using the revised code.

That doesn't matter, because the paper will have your choice on it, verified by you and you alone.

Hence the point of the paper trail.
 
Hey just imagine if the Senate and House of Representatives passed bills using anonymous electronic voting systems, it would be much faster, right?

Also, this would eliminate all those stupid he voted, she voted for campaign ads we always see during election time. This also allows the politicians vote the way they want without the possible reprecussion of not toeing the party line.
 
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: RichardE
My Atm withdrawl will not decide my life for the next 4 years.

My vote could.

next

And if you're halfway intelligent you would still refuse to use an ATM that was incapable of printing a receipt at all, even if you declined to have it actually print one most of the time.

The analogy actually holds up pretty well.

No, it doesn't.

A better analogy would be would you accept a contract without a copy of it, or without being able to sign it, yet still have it be legally binding. The only hope you have it is what you want is what you said it was what you wanted it to be.

That is what you are doing with those voting machines.

You do that all the time, when you buy phone, internet, and other services and it says on the contract 'we reserve the right to change the terms of this contract without asking your permission' or words to that effect.

I frankly do not understand why you are making this argument, because while not identical (thus the term 'analogy') the two situations are clearly similar.
 
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: RichardE
My Atm withdrawl will not decide my life for the next 4 years.

My vote could.

next

And if you're halfway intelligent you would still refuse to use an ATM that was incapable of printing a receipt at all, even if you declined to have it actually print one most of the time.

The analogy actually holds up pretty well.

No, it doesn't.

A better analogy would be would you accept a contract without a copy of it, or without being able to sign it, yet still have it be legally binding. The only hope you have it is what you want is what you said it was what you wanted it to be.

That is what you are doing with those voting machines.

You do that all the time, when you buy phone, internet, and other services and it says on the contract 'we reserve the right to change the terms of this contract without asking your permission' or words to that effect.

I frankly do not understand why you are making this argument, because while not identical (thus the term 'analogy') the two situations are clearly similar.

They are not though unless you like breaking things down into the very smallest terms.
 
Democrats want to tax the receipts and Republicans say they are terrorist related.

Just wanted to make sure this thread belongs in P&N.
 
probably not on the ATM, as i keep the reciept till i can right it down in my check register. the voting thing just makes me feel empty.
 
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: RichardE
My Atm withdrawl will not decide my life for the next 4 years.

My vote could.

next

And if you're halfway intelligent you would still refuse to use an ATM that was incapable of printing a receipt at all, even if you declined to have it actually print one most of the time.

The analogy actually holds up pretty well.

No, it doesn't.

A better analogy would be would you accept a contract without a copy of it, or without being able to sign it, yet still have it be legally binding. The only hope you have it is what you want is what you said it was what you wanted it to be.

That is what you are doing with those voting machines.

You do that all the time, when you buy phone, internet, and other services and it says on the contract 'we reserve the right to change the terms of this contract without asking your permission' or words to that effect.

I frankly do not understand why you are making this argument, because while not identical (thus the term 'analogy') the two situations are clearly similar.

They are not though unless you like breaking things down into the very smallest terms.

That's completely nonsensical, but I've just told you that you sign contracts all the time without full nowledge of the terms, or even with terms that can change to the other party's benefit at any time.
 
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Originally posted by: techs
Would you use an ATM that didn't give a receipt?
And in case of dispute there would be no way to verify who was right.

So why would you use a voting machine that doesn't give a receipt or have a way to verify your vote was counted accurately?

Just curious.

I always select the "No receipt" option at the ATM
Bad comparison

Same here and agreed on bad comparison.
 
Back
Top