The computer that can predict your vote

[tambourine-man]

The computer that can predict your vote

There's a computer program which can predict how - and if - you'll vote, based on where you shop and which newspaper you buy. How does it work? Science fiction has become reality with a computer program whose makers claim it can predict the future with quite remarkable accuracy.

According to the program, Paan - which stands for Political Advanced Analysis Network - Tony Blair has got the next general election in the bag - despite Iraq, tuition fees and suspicions that tax rises are on the way.

Paan uses a mass of political and social information, including shopping habits, ethnic background and car ownership to produce predictions in every constituency. Despite its complexity, it can be operated from a PC. In 2002, for instance, it got the Welsh Assembly elections pretty much spot on, miscalling only one seat, despite complications such as three-way marginals and proportional representation.

The system was devised by a whiz kid in his mid-20s who was inspired by the theories of Professor Stephen Hawking that technology would advance to such a point that the future could be predicted if computers were fed enough information.

Read more...

Not sure if this is political or techie???

[Malk-a-mite]

I was willing to swear this was a post about Diebold as I was clicking on the link...

:)

[tambourine-man]

*smiles* yeah...

On which note...

Voting Paper Trail Advocate Dies In 'Tragic Accident'

The subject line on Tuesday's email read: "Another mysterious accident solves a Bush problem. Athan Gibbs dead, Diebold lives." The attached news story briefly described the untimely Friday, March 12, death of perhaps America's most influential advocate of a verified voting paper trail in the era of touch screen computer voting.

Gibbs, an accountant for more than 30 years and the inventor of the TruVote system, died when his vehicle collided with an 18-wheeled truck which rolled his Chevy Blazer several times and forced it over the highway retaining wall where it came to rest on its roof...

Read more...

"Dum, dum, dum... another one bites the dust..."

[JackSpratts]

the whole paper trail thing is a canard, a misdirection away from the real problem. unless the machine has a secondary, mechanical system in place independent of the digital system that contacts the paper slips through a system of gears and pulleys from voter's hand to stamp, like an old fashioned hand-cranked adding machine (and to my knowledge no one is proposing this), the paper slips will be as easily hackable as the electronic "slips." the problem isn't a lack of paper, the problem is the fact that hackers can crack the system without leaving a trail. once those electrons have been massaged to write phony paper slips it just gets worse, since the auditors are then convinced the counts are valid.

any democracy that puts it's faith in pure electronic voting might just as well officially cease being a democracy, because that’s what will probably happen sooner or later anyway.

- js.

[tambourine-man]

Actually, I agree. I have yet to be told why marking an 'x' in a box, is something that we need to move away from. It's tried and tested and the usual arguments are simply that it's old-fasioned or takes too long to count... as if democracy (or at least the illusion of it) isn't worth spending a couple of hours extra every four years, counting the votes by hand, or that the validity of the vote was irrelevant. If it aint broke, don't fix it (although I can accept that the 'hanging chads' episode probably prompted these changes - ironically they'll probably result in the same situation).

Time to quote my favourite quote:
Humanity, let us say, is like people packed in a automobile which is traveling downhill without lights at a terrific speed and driven by a four-year-old child. The signposts along the way are all marked "progress."
~ Lord Dunsany~

[AweShucks]

What some fail to realize is that it is your responsibility to verify that the ballot was properly filled out. If there is an error it is your responsibility to properly correct it.
But the issue is some people need to have someone hold their hand in certain situations regardless. So as a result they try to make it idiot proof.
What the rest fail to realize is that with any process there is going to be a scrap factor. It is nearly impossible to make a process of this magnitude 100% accurate "no scrap". Somehow somewhere someone will screw it up no matter how you do it However an electronic system will prevent and eliminate the issue of "chads" and the "voters intent" where a panel decides which was more likely the voters choice *cough*

In the end paper works just fine......... fix the people.