Sub-station

uninterruptible power supplies ltd Time to Digitize Elections / State has certified digitized election equipment from 4 manufacturers

by:KEBO      2019-11-02
A voter used a touch screen in November.In Binhe county, the first one was completely transformed into a new technology.Press-Carlos Puma used the touch screen in November for corporate photos taken through the relevant PressA voter.In Binhe county, the first one was completely transformed into a new technology.Press-Carlos Puma's corporate photos taken through the relevant technologies have helped us get into the current presidential dilemma, but it has not been able to get us out of it.At this point, we have no choice but to rely on real human beings.-From the volunteer counter to the Supreme Court judge.-Try your best to solve the confusion left by voting devices that are too tolerant to make mistakes, too stupid to solve the ambiguity.But technology can help us avoid such problems in the future.From ourselves and our political leaders, all we need is some hard thinking and vision of the options, and the courage to fight irrational reactions.Technological Bias and collective willingness to invest the necessary resources to bring the technological foundation of our democracy into the 21 st century.If this year's fiasco took place eight or even four years ago, it would be more difficult to make such an argument.To be sure, highAt that time, the technical voting systems were there, but they were basically not tested, and they were very expensive for most jurisdictions.Legitimate concerns and problems remain today-Experts warn that there will be no system without trade --Risks and risks-The outline of the technical repair is much clearer.Or at least that's what I 've collected from an hour and a half of conversation.In the past few weeks, there have been more than a dozen experts in this previously esoteric field.Moreover, public officials in California have also played a prominent role in indicating the way forward.There are five voting technologies in the United States today.According to data from the Washington DC Election Data ServiceC.Consulting companies specializing in such matters, only 1.In 1998, 6% of American voters expressed their preference for ordinary votes.The figures for this year have not yet come out.) Another 18.6% investment in Northeast China-Old-fashioned lever machine.A third vote on one or the other.Card Equipment--Now the infamous ChadPower generation systems like South Florida.Some 27.Optical instruments are used by 3% of votersscan systems --Those systems that work like the school test system, where voters mark a paper vote and then read it by a scanner.There's only one of our 11 people.-9.1 percent --Voting on so-called "direct recording Electronics" (DRE) terminals, the digital system is usually paired with a touch screen for displaying voting and receiving voter input.The problem with the first three systems is very obvious: there will be various voter errors in paper ballot papers, such as misplaced places and multiple marks, in the best case, they are always important.There are some positive aspects of the lever machine.-They don't let you vote twice for the same office and they let you change your mind without a fine until the voting process is over ---But they are large and have not been produced for decades.(Jurisdictions that still rely on them must compete for spare parts.) As for punch-Card system, dual card problemThis month alone, punching, shaking doors and dimples may have entered the consciousness of the masses, but these have always been known to close observers.Prior to the 1988 election, The New Yorker published a lengthy article by Texas journalist Ronnie Duger, focusing on the defects of the equipment brand that is still in use in South Florida.Similar machines were standard in San Francisco at the time, and the Chronicle's own Herb Caen sent a warning to local voters: "make the killing real, beautiful and clean.Too much chad ...It is possible to confuse easily confusing computers, which is a perfect match for easily confusing voters."In recent years, the most popular voting technology in jurisdictions where new equipment has been purchased is optical-scan (a.k.a."marksense" --If you mark them, the machine will perceive them.Just this year, San Francisco spent $3 million to change that.Optical-Scanning has some obvious advantages: The device is now out of dateAfter testing, the price is relatively cheap and anyone who passes our school is familiar with this routine.But optical-Scanning systems have several major drawbacks compared to DRE technology: first, they still need paper votes, and printing is not cheap-In states like California, in particular, there must be many voting claims included and voting must be provided in multiple languages.If an error is found after printing, the entire job must be re-run.Second, opticsThe scanning system is facing the same problem as paper ballot papers and punch cards: they are vulnerable to mistakes from careless or confused voters, they have too many scores, or put them in the wrong place, or use your own pen and pencil instead of the special pen and pencil provided.This is by no means a small problem, nor a problem isolated from Florida.According to Bill Kimberling, deputy director of the electoral administration office of the Federal Election Commission, experienced election officials, "voters sit at home the night before the election and invent ways to make them suffer."To a large extentIn recent years, the tech voting program has been discussed, and most of the discussions have focused on Internet voting, which is often defined as allowing people to vote online at home and in the office.Obviously, this approach has a great appeal in the long run;There are a lot of interesting ideas and suggestions on how to implement it.One state --Arizona --A trial run has been carried out (Gore did not object in this year's Democratic primary ).However, almost every expert group that has considered Internet voting has concluded that it is not ready for large-scale implementation: computer equipment and expertise are too uneven in our society, the network is not secure and reliable enough to ensure the integrity of the elections.California's online election task force, which last year convened by State Secretary Bill Jones, gave a detailed report on these issues on January 20 last year.-see www.ss.ca.Government/Administration/ivote /.But DRE --the touch-Screen solution-is a high-Technical methods that can be implemented immediately.Back in 1998, DRE was still bleeding when San Francisco chose an optical scan --Edge Technology-No such system has obtained the required certification from the Secretary of State's office.But now there are four DRE vendors here that have been certified for equipment.The first real-The state's life test was held in Piemont in March 1999, and the devices won "positive reviews", according to city staff and MIS Director Ann Swift ".This year, eight California counties, including Alameda and San Mateo, have deployed similar systems on a limited basisThose who voted in absentia-Plans to enable residents to vote before Election Day without getting stuck in the hassle of absentee voting.Alameda County still relies heavily on punchingBut that's because a few years ago, the county task force decided not to upgrade until a certified electronic system is available."We don't think it makes sense to replace paper systems with another paper system," said voter registrar Brad Clark .".That's why he arranged the Piemont experiment and bought 50 touch-Since then, the screen system."I'm very happy with them," Clark said ."."I will deploy their county-If you can."But alamida has lost the chance to become the first county to fully convert into touch --Screen system: this month, Riverside County in Southern California received this award.There are 615,000 voters in the county, 7,200 square miles away, and 4,250 such machines have been installed in 715 locations.According to Mischelle Townsend, voter registration officer, the vote went very smoothly this month."This system is beyond our expectations," she told me ."."We got 99% of the support rate from voters, mostly at the highest level."It's not hard to understand why Riverside County voters have approved the new equipment :--This system is easy for voters to learn-Just touch the box next to your choice--Mistakes are almost impossible.The system does not allow more candidates to vote in any competition than is allowed.The system can also be programmed to ask voters to confirm that they really don't want to vote in any of the matches they skip.Like before.Old-fashioned leveraged machines, voters can change their minds at the last minute without the risk of damaging the votes.--Can easily accommodate multiple languages-Only the correct font and careful translation are required.Users simply select the language available on the first screen.--Long votes can be handled as easily as short votes, as they can be spread on as many screens as possible at almost no extra cost.Again, small types are unnecessary, which makes it easier for those with limited literacy or vision problems to vote.If an error is found before the election, it can be corrected quickly and cheaply without throwing away a large number of printed votes.--It is certainly possible to design a confusing electronic vote.-Take a look at some of the dialog boxes that Microsoft and many other software companies have successfully made.But as Lorrie Faith Cranor, who works on safety systems at & t labs, points out, the digital canvas provides ample space and freedom of design, such atrocities as the West Palm Beach butterfly vote are unlikely to happen.--Voting can be listed quickly and easily with little risk of error.Ultimately, it should be possible to transfer the results directly from the polling station to the election administrator.According to Townsend, modules of voting machines are collected at eight sites in Riverside County, which are inserted into the card reader of the laptop.The results of each center are then transmitted to the registrar's office through the county's secure communication network instead of the Internet.I only know that there are two serious objections to this technology.First, some Americans worry about the security and integrity of the electronic election system.They are worried that the device will be as unreliable as their computer, or that a power outage may ruin the tickets that have already been voted.Others are concerned that hackers, even equipment suppliers or government-hired programmers, may somehow manipulate the results.Some specifically object to the absence of written evidence in the event of a dispute.I think this is where we go into the field of irrational fear.It is not to say that these problems are unthinkable, but that it is entirely possible to take preventive measures so that they are unlikely to happen ---Compared to the risks associated with our current voting equipment, the likelihood is much smaller.Every computer scientist knows that it is possible to make a digital machine that is more reliable than a Windows pc.It is also possible to equip them with uninterrupted power supplies and design them so that they can record them in redundant electronic security memory modules in encrypted form immediately after voting.As for hackers, the voting system does not have to be connected to the Internet--At the moment, they should probably run independently.The problem with rogue code can also be solved.Many states have asked suppliers to vote.Inventory the device and host its source code under lock and key, which can be audited line by line.The hardware can be tested over and over again, and the integrity of the software can be verified before and after each vote.Michael Shamos is a nationally recognized authority on these issues.He is a professor of computer science at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, a lawyer for a famous Pittsburgh company, and a voting lawyer.Equipment inspectors in Pennsylvania and Texas.(He also had the difference of rejecting Votomatic punch 20 years ago --Card equipment used in West Palm Beach.) Here's him at e-When I asked him about the security of the electronic voting system, mail said: "The DRE system is by far the easiest system to audit and the least easy to tamper.The reason is that they contain complex redundant encryption protection that is as difficult to subvert as the nuclear launch code.Anyone can tamper with paperPunch-in votingcard or mark-sense election.Few people on earth can change elections.The real reason behind the fear of these systems, he said, is the concern about "visibility ---Some people still want a piece of paper that they can see, assuming that its specificity guarantees its integrity to some extent.But in other areas of life, we have long gone beyond that fantasy, says Mr. Shamos."Do you keep the money in the bank?" he asked."Are you on a plane of 747?To some extent, we have believed that computers are important things in our lives.The second question about touchscreen-Their cost is based on the voting system.According to Clark, Alameda County paid $3,300 for each of its 50 touchesScreen system, plus more than $70,000 in peripheral equipment required.Riverside County spent more than $13 million on its 4,250 systems-Over $3,000 per vehicle.Much more than optical.scan equipment.Christiane Hayashi, communications manager, San Francisco's electoral department, said that when the city considered its options in 1998, the DRE option (assuming the California certification problem could have been overcome) cost more than three times as much as the optical systemScan options: $10 million$3 million.The difference is not just the capital cost of the previous period.-Kimberling, as the center, reminded me.High-It is much more expensive to maintain, store, test and transport technical equipment.One risk for DRE, he added, is that when jurisdictions that have to make such decisions ---Usually County Council-come face-to-In the face of costs, they will decide to reduce the number of machines purchased, resulting in long queues at polling stations.-Our democracy has hardly taken a step forward.But there is another side to the story: Electronic voting eliminates the cost of printing votes.Townsend in Riverside County said her county spent $1 in 1998.4 million print the ballot paper (half of the votes were eventually thrown away because only about 50% of registered voters actually appeared in the vote ).With Drey, the county saved $600,000 by not printing votes in this month's elections, she said.Next year, when the results of this year's census may force Riverside to start offering Spain-These savings will be multiplied by language voting.In fact, Townsend says her "conservative calculations" indicate that Riverside's new device will be paid within nine years, but the manufacturer assures her that it should last for at least 20 years.Even the stupidest politicians should have a hard time opposing the algorithm.If more counties take the DRE route, more quantities of this equipment will reduce the cost of leading counties along the river.Nevertheless, for the sake of the discussion, let's assume that her calculations have stopped and touch-The screen system will not save more than the cost.Should we then choose a shoddy technology that saves only tens of millions of dollars per county?The answer to me is clear: let's pay the right price.This will play a leading role not only at the county level, but also at the state and federal levels.Last week, California Secretary of State Jones proposed spending $0.23 billion to modernize California's electoral system, including a touch plug-in, although he did not formally endorse any particular technologyScreen technology.Jones, Townsend, Clark and the rest.Forward-thinking officials are guiding the way.The real question is whether voters will support them when the bill expires, especially after the dust of the Florida fiasco has settled (assuming the lucky day will come sooner or later ).Keep this in mind when in doubt: almost every quickToday, food shops in this land have touch screens.Can't we do what we can to make the core mechanism of our democracy work the way we all know it?
Custom message
Chat Online 编辑模式下无法使用
Chat Online inputting...