67hgfwwy (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

riggznit good point. Computer Scientists that are against using electronic machines? What? That seems to be a little contidictary to their pursuits in life? It's good enough for phones, computers, banking, wallstreet, the news, the internet, your car, your pursuit in life. But not with voting. ??? What?? What is their angle? Everyone has an angle. The guy with the ponytail seems to be a serious tool. I seen him in anyother video where he ranked the machine as a 7. Thats my lucky number.

67hgfwwy (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Well eXXO as the crazies would say out there. If you have a unique personal mark on the ballot that would clearly not be TRANSPARENT CONFIDENTIALITY. You really don't get the whole picture. Your idea of how voting should go doesn't speak on behalf of the majority. Your complaints are the minority and as all know that nothing is infaluable the amount of faluability is the question. Not the fact that it is faluable.

eXX0 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

So you don't want the guy who counts the vote to know what you voted for? How is he supposed to count your vote then? That doesn't mean you put your NAME on the ballot, of course, duh!

riggznit (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

The fact is people these guys. So called Computer scientists insist on paper? Without putting paper through the same red team attack with paper experts? No that isn't a complete study that is ignorant and irresponsible and should completely discredit anything these guys have to say at all. Come on who are the idiots here? They don't even know that voting process has to be confidential by law. Do you want your dickhead boss a dedicated Republican to know you voted Democratic?

riggznit (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

erotocharter, Moronic can't be associated with fact. The fact that your red team attack was an unrealistic and not taking into acount the actual voting process. To attack a machine as if it stands alone without other safe guards is fictious and irresponsible. Your simple mind has not taking into account all the other safequards in place. Anything man built can be taken apart so with that said, Are you saying we shouldn't vote at all? Come on say something else stupid!! Love It!!!

eratocharter (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Why do some of you moronic posters assume UCSB is attacking Sequoia? UCSB is simply saying that anyone, whether affiliated with the manufacturer or not, can tamper with the machine and its components. DUH.

eratocharter (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Hey - good idea! Now why aren't we using fingerprinting?

eXcommunicate1979 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Just use fucking PAPER BALLOTS. Then a quick dip of the finger into purple INK to prevent voting fraud. Jesus Christ.

67hgfwwy (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Nado1377 Thank You!! Its Funny that these groups that are out to destroy the voting system companies have the same goals as the companies do, to protect voter integrity. Yet these group consistently attack those companies. What ever happened to collaboration wouldn't that be more benefitial to the voting public? The media sells the news and thrives off of controversy, it sells!! So why can't we all get along and work together to protect the voting public from malicious people?

nado1377 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

ANY electronic voting machine is subject to tampering -if you have beef with sequoia, then take it up with them. You have not only compromised voter confidence in counties that use sequoia voting equipment by posting this on youtube, but you've also given possible hackers ideas on how to tamper with this important election. Voters in sequoia counties have no other alternative than to use their equipment. I think I know why you posted this, and I also think that your reasons are selfish.