There's fraud and then there's suspicion of fraud.
The suspicion, which I think is at least as big a problem as the fraud itself, is reduced because my organization and other trusted experts can attest that the machines software and hardware are secure. /thread
The suspicion, which I think is at least as big a problem as the fraud itself, is reduced because my organization and other trusted experts can attest that the machines software and hardware are secure. /thread
https://twitter.com/ScooterSchaefer/status/1366937363436498947
There are experts on both sides of the aisle and experts on neither side of the aisle who can collectively certify that the counting is secure OR who can help identify and fix vulnerabilities. I'm in discussions now with left-leaning orgs who also believe this is important.
This is much better than the current situation with black boxes where executives tell the public to "just trust us." That creates a space for theories - both valid and invalid - to thrive and undermine faith in our electoral system.
To anyone commenting about the lack of trust in electronic voting machines - these are all machines that will be producing/counting/relying on paper ballots. Even HR1 requires paper ballots and we're not ever going to a system that lacks them.
Microsoft themselves has produced open source software for election systems - news.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/….
And while some may be suspicions of @microsoft, suspicion is unwarranted here because.. you can see every line of code as it's OPEN SOURCE.
And while some may be suspicions of @microsoft, suspicion is unwarranted here because.. you can see every line of code as it's OPEN SOURCE.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
