Hackers, Public Differ Greatly On E-voting 369
cweditor writes "Sorry to be touting one of my own Computerworld stories, but I only covered it because I found it so interesting. The Ponemon Institute surveyed 2,933 members of the general public and then 100 DEFCON and Black Hat attendees to get their views on electronic voting. 'The degree of difference was startling,' said director Larry Ponemon. It was the biggest split between 'experts and the public he'd ever found. For example, 83% of the experts said e-voting is less or much less secure against election tampering than paper ballots, compared with just 19% of the general public."
Re:I probably haven't thought this out... (Score:3, Informative)
probably not Stalin's quote (Score:3, Informative)
I've attributed it to him in the past, but it's probably not. Hooray for google leading me to the right page.
http://www.google.com/search?q=count+votes+deci
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/week
Re:Re paying people (Score:3, Informative)
Among the witnesses, the people representing their parties were not paid by the government, maybe they were being paid by their party, I don't know. The other officials acting as witnesses were also being paid by the government. All those people took oaths, and it was all done in a very strict manner.
And yes, people from the public were allowed in the room (up to a certain limit) during the counting.
Re:Diebold CEO Promises to "Deliver" for Bush (Score:3, Informative)
That's a link to the whole story. Or, if you prefer, this [ohio.com] one has that quote in it as well. I think the Flamebait rating of the parent was a little harsh. There are lots of reasons to be suspicious of e-voting machines, this one just happens to be a glaring one. (IMHO) This would also serve as proof of sorts that the "general public" that was interviewed for this study probably didn't read this article (and probably doesn't read nearly as many articles about this type of issue as
Actually (Score:2, Informative)