Microsoft Voting Machines

They'll fuck with the votes no matter whose software it is, but Microsoft is not capable of making reliable software. Just look at any software that they shit out, it's all slow bloated buggy garbage.

ElectionGuard allows you to verify that your vote was correctly counted and was not modified. Unlike other current voting machines where votes are a database that anyone could potentially be secretly edited. This cryptography scheme for ElectionGuard was created by Josh Benaloh from Microsoft Research.

But muh racism...

The work from Microsoft research is solid work. The real world implementations have to carry a lot of baggage as Microsoft has a strong commitment to being backwards compatible.

such things should not run any kind of proprietary software

try to hack a sheet of paper and a blue handstamp

Washington, and the Washington National Guard were already in a partnership with Microsoft, Amazon, Google for the 2016 election.

How will they do that? Delete Trump from search results?

Fucking cuck "nadella"! Please, someone shoot him. Fucking imbecile pajeet.

Mouse Without Borders is based as fuck, and it's from Mircosoft.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7178881/Undercover-video-shows-senior-Google-executive-vowing-prevent-Trump-situation.html

i hope that theres at least a independent public audit of all the software that is used in those machines. bad things will happen some day if they just allow proprietary internet connected machines to handle things like voting. maybe not in the beginning because then plans to start using them might get cancelled but in the future when most have started using the machines.

Hey, that's a cool idea. Next time I want to have some piece of software that doesn't exist I'll just open a repo for it and wait for someone else to implement it.

true. You can't really see what the machine is doing, unlike a paper ballot. but when I read
It actually starts sounding like a decent idea. It depends on how it'll be executed though. How is it done? Best thing would probably a public list with everyone's votes plus a assymetric cryptographic token that cannot be used in reverse to find the person by the vote but the person can track his vote werent Microsoft if they wouldn't compromise on some part of the concept midway.

youtube.com/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI

kys

But sure, if you don't want to engage with any of the arguments presented in the video, that's fine.

Ok. Thanks for absolving me of having to watch a video from a faggot eceleb aimed at normie cattle.

Read this blog post from MS blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2019/05/06/protecting-democratic-elections-through-secure-verifiable-voting/

the american voting system is fucked but proprietary software wont fix it. they just need to verify the identity of the voters like every sane country does. at least here they send you some papers in mail that you have to take to the voting place or they wont let you vote. its a broken system if the same person can make multiple valid votes.

No, that's illegal.
diebold

Ayo hol up, das rayciss! Bruthas cain't get ID, nigga, bcuz we was slaves a hunnid and fiddy yeas ago! Like, we roll down to the ID office or whateva, but they ain't on colored people's time, nigga. They close at 5 p-to-tha-m, nigga, I ain't even finished my first Olde English by then, gnome sayan? An' my momma ain't got no birf certificate fo me. She ain't keepin' none of that whypipo bulllllsheeit. Nigga, how'm I suppose to prove to the ID niggas that I was born? Nigga, I'm heah, ain't I? Voter ID laws is bulllllsheeit, gnome sayan?

the best way to solve this problem come election day: domestic terrorism targeted at power grid infrastructure

Microsoft is capable of good code when it suits them - it just doesn't care about the shit it drops on the heads of the peons.

You know what would solve this issue? Using paper ballots like they've been doing for centuries.

Today I saw yet another McDonalds self-serve kiosk displaying a BSOD. What could possibly go wrong?

with paper ballots are you able to confirm that your vote was actually counted and not thrown out for some (((reason)))?

Can't tell if you're stupid or just very fat.

its weird that such things would run a full desktop os. some simple embedded thing should be enough.

Come on, burger. Can't you shove anything better down your throat?

It's just the usual cost minimization. Optimizing the process is way more expensive than just crafting a pajeet solution in this case.

Paper ballots are better than having your vote as some digital number everyone can fuck around with.

the pajeet could still make it in java and it could be put on some arm board instead of the windows pc

Likely it's a combination of both: a stripped-down Windows without the overhead of the full desktop shell, specifically for embedded applications. Windows runs on all sorts of shit you wouldn't expect to find it: ATMs, kiosk-displays, etc. Plebbit has a good collection of public BSODs.
reddit.com/r/PBSOD/

The biggest problem I see, beside MS's involvement is the fact that just because each person can verify their own vote, doesn't mean the totals are valid. The only way I can think of to verify every step is to handle each vote like a transaction (the transaction would carry the vote, not be the vote itself, so voting multiple times just pisses way your tokens and doesn't actually get counted multiple times) in a block chain, the network wouldn't allow modified miners to mine, and attacks would become very evident. Though you would need to incentive citizens to mine some how, since you wouldn't be able to trust it being handled by the government or any large centralized entities. Maybe allow citizens to exchange the extra tokens for bonds or a tax deduction. This still leaves the possibility of people buying and selling votes (by selling their private keys). Not to mention since a significant portion of the population is convinced anything that contains the phrase "block chain" is a ponzi scheme that's going to take their money, steal their ID, burn their dog down and rape their house, i doubt there will be enough public trust in the system.

The description in >>1078702's post sounds the most sound, really. If everything is done in a highly visible manner (maybe even have the counting broadcast live on local tv, ID's are verified but not connected to the ballots, and voters are marked with that ink that doesn't come off, there shouldn't be a way to tamper. Most importantly, it's simple enough that the many eyes watching to verify its integrity know wtf they are looking at and looking for.

This URL needs to be shortened and posted on every sign in my city.

With election guard, they will be caught for doing so. Hence the name.

From what I understand, all the encrypted votes will be public so that you can run a verifier program to recount them yourself. They are also hoping that many third parties do this verification against the results no it can be trusted.

Earlier I thought you were shitposting but now I can't tell if you're actually a paid shill or not.

It's possible that all of the records could be messed with in a way that no-one could notice, however, having worked in an electoral office counting votes, let me tell you that there's so much redundancy that it would take a massive oversight on the part of dozens of people to have the numbers messed with at even one location. That said, there are other ways to mess with it, depending on what country you're talking about. People voting without ID (which can be easily fixed but there's no political will for it), falsifying absentee votes, etc. That said, the shortcomings pale in comparison to those of voting machines.

No, Microsoft is the reason I got laid off from my last company. They changed their contract with us, so we had to downsize. I am a fan of Microsoft Research though.