Skip to main content

Machine Voter Fraud

I am not claiming machine voting fraud exists.  I am only making a case for how easy it is.  Let's do it by the numbers.
1. Remember Volkswagen' scam of programming their devices to show incorrect and legal emissions when in testing mode, but otherwise allowed (honest) higher gas consumption.  VW was caught only by accident - you will recall. This was deep and secretive programming.

2. Is it possible that voting machines have a similar type of deep programming, but in reverse.  They work perfectly in test mode; they bias votes under field conditions.  There are a couple of easy alternative methods to mask the difference between test and actual modes, particularly if there is no test mode.


3. It is painfully easy, if you control the machines and software development. Moreover, it is nearly impossible to detect.  Calibration has nothing to do with this. The election commissions could re-image the machines after every vote. But the scam is retained.  It is sort of like trying to eliminate a Trojan horse (type of  computer virus) by rebooting the computer.  It doesn't work.  My goodness, I could write such a code in FORTRAN, in C, even in Basic.

4. Certainly election officials are not equipped to detect this type of fraud.  Certifying agencies for voting machines also cannot.  New tests need to be created.  Certainly, printing paper ballots from the machine might help, but programming obviates this, as well.   Cute.

5. I am not trying to sound alarmist, but am simply conjecturing what I can conceive of. If I can, others can.  The stakes in modern elections are so high, and there has been such a decline in individual and group morality, that many operatives would not hesitate to do this - if only they knew how.  Some do!

6. Somebody ought to check this out. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Please Comment.

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03
Post a Comment
Read more

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of
Post a Comment
Read more

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view
Post a Comment
Read more