OT: Here Come the Fireworks...

Well, no; she says "we're getting ready" meaning she/they aren't ready.

No fireworks seen. Smokeworks, or fog, or smokescreen, but no fire.

Every candy store has a Lotto machine, which is a full custom design made for security and reliability, but the voting machines seem to have no security at all.

We're getting ready to sucker as many dummies as possible for their cash by telling them we need their money to finish getting this bombshell evidence together and then we gonna split while the gettin's good!

It's almost like when you have a public-private partnership you often don't get "the best of both worlds", particularly with systems where there's a relatively fine division between carbonara and scrambled-egg spaghetti.

Probably not. ZeroHedge is in the business of telling half-wits like Cursitor Doom what they wan to hear, and their lawyer is in business of believing in dubious evidence so that somebody will pay her to present it in court.

Voting machine software is going to be protected like an mission-critical software. A thumb-drive isn't going to be able to subvert it.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Or none that a lawyer would know about. Or would want to know about. She'll get paid for presenting the case, no matter how fatuous it turns out to be.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Unfortunately, that is not true. America has a collection of hopelessly badly designed and implemented voting machines, with all sorts of security issues. And yes, previous tests and demonstrations have shown that a thumb-drive /is/ enough to screw up some of them. (Hopefully known cases have been fixed - I don't think they are as bad as they used to be.)

Bizarrely, Tom is correct - security and reliability of gambling machines is hugely higher than that of voting machines in the USA.

But fortunately, these systems are such an inconsistent jumble of patchwork that trying to arrange a conspiracy to steal votes from them to win an election would be an insurmountable challenge - far harder than simply wining the election fairly and legally. And the evidence left behind would be /real/ and massive, not purely in the imagination of sore losers.

You can expect errors due to poor quality voting machines. But not /intentional/ vote manipulation.

This particular Trump campaign claim is not about the voting machines, however, but about the systems higher up in the food chain that aggregate the votes. /Those/ are likely to be a lot more secure and reliable.

Regrettably, scandalously, that is *completely* wrong. There have been many demonstrated exploits. Start by looking at comp.risks, the moderated group with a very high signal to noise ratio:

Note the timescales in the results to that query.

The problens were there when Trump was elected, but he didn't complain then. I wonder why?

Until mid-January, it's still Other People's Money financing legal footwork.

I hope he's ready for removal of the teflon Presidential priviledge, or his own legal problems will only increase, if libel and fraud are not prudently avoided.

RL

Maybe in your alternative universe but not in the real world. That bitch's so-called eyewitness is this demented pig here:

The whole bunch are subnormal IQ sociopaths who will do anything for money. They should be thrown in the vat at the nearest convenient fat rendering plant, alive.

Well, whatever the source, if they can demonstrate the presence of a flipping algorithm then it's 99% job done and the corpulence of the witness won't even come into it.

LOL, is this happening in the US or some place in Central Africa. What now, Trump will have to be evicted out of the White House, his supporters guard will get to arms and be in the way of that.... Pathetic.

"I have TONS of evidence!"

"Can you show us some of that evidence?"

"no."

Jon

Well, there are still the PAPER ballots that all states seem to be using now. So, just go and count them, with the original ink marks left by the voters. You can't change those remotely through the internet.

It seems at least Georgia is doing that right now.

Jon

That's completely wrong.

You'd also have to demonstrate that it could work without detectable side-effects, that it was used, that it was used by someone supporting Biden, and that it caused a big enough effect to sway the election. I think that's a lot more than just 1% of the job.

I suggest you stick to electronics as law certainly ain't your thing! :-D

Cursitor Doom doesn't know anything about electronics or law, but he does know which right-wing fantasies he likes. He can suggest what he likes, but nobody sane is going to take him seriously.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

I've heard that exact expression used to ridicule tears.

RL