NJ clecks ask NJ AJ to investigate voting discrepancies. IE in the primary the machines had e-voting problems that the manufacturer does not want investigated by the state, but by their own so called independent companies that I have no doubt are not independent. The manufacturers in my book are basically shielding any independent investigation by claiming there is so state of the art know how involved in these basic adding machines. this I believe is to stop real independent review. Since these machines are paid for and developed in essence with taxpayers money should this hide and seek be public disclosure? after all if the vote is not accurate do we have a democracy?
In my book in New Jersey where they have found in their testing severe error rates that would collapse the world banking system in a day if these same rates were found. I have heard these are the same machines that were not certified in California.
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index....xml&coll=1
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index....xml&coll=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/opinion/...amp;oref=slogin
As an Engineer I can say that designing a voting machine are about as simple as simple gets. That in my book there is nothing worthy of the so intellectual property claims they are making. These are for heavens sakes counters that add….. any c average college programmer could easily make a working system. There is nothing here that is rocket science. So the claim of intellectual property in my book is nothing but a smoke screen. If they had a bullet proof black box there is nothing that an outsider could do, just like ATMs that are out open to complete vulnerability day in day out.
When do the rights of a company over weigh the security of democracy? Is intellectual property a valid argument or a sham in this case? Do
they have the right to threaten a university professor as thought police?
edit to add more background and moved the question to the end.
In my book in New Jersey where they have found in their testing severe error rates that would collapse the world banking system in a day if these same rates were found. I have heard these are the same machines that were not certified in California.
QUOTE
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,143628-c...ts/article.html
http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9897597-38.html?tag=newsmap
On Tuesday, Felten posted e-mail he and fellow Princeton professor Andrew Appel received from Sequoia saying:
As you have likely read in the news media, certain New Jersey election officials have stated that they plan to send to you one or more Sequoia Advantage voting machines for analysis. I want to make you aware that if the County does so, it violates their established Sequoia licensing Agreement for use of the voting system. Sequoia has also retained counsel to stop any infringement of our intellectual properties, including any non-compliant analysis. We will also take appropriate steps to protect against any publication of Sequoia software, its behavior, reports regarding same or any other infringement of our intellectual property.
http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9897597-38.html?tag=newsmap
On Tuesday, Felten posted e-mail he and fellow Princeton professor Andrew Appel received from Sequoia saying:
As you have likely read in the news media, certain New Jersey election officials have stated that they plan to send to you one or more Sequoia Advantage voting machines for analysis. I want to make you aware that if the County does so, it violates their established Sequoia licensing Agreement for use of the voting system. Sequoia has also retained counsel to stop any infringement of our intellectual properties, including any non-compliant analysis. We will also take appropriate steps to protect against any publication of Sequoia software, its behavior, reports regarding same or any other infringement of our intellectual property.
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index....xml&coll=1
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index....xml&coll=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/opinion/...amp;oref=slogin
As an Engineer I can say that designing a voting machine are about as simple as simple gets. That in my book there is nothing worthy of the so intellectual property claims they are making. These are for heavens sakes counters that add….. any c average college programmer could easily make a working system. There is nothing here that is rocket science. So the claim of intellectual property in my book is nothing but a smoke screen. If they had a bullet proof black box there is nothing that an outsider could do, just like ATMs that are out open to complete vulnerability day in day out.
When do the rights of a company over weigh the security of democracy? Is intellectual property a valid argument or a sham in this case? Do
they have the right to threaten a university professor as thought police?
edit to add more background and moved the question to the end.
QUOTE(inventor @ Mar 23 2008, 03:06 PM) 
When do the rights of a company over weigh the security of democracy? Is intellectual property a valid argument or a sham in this case? Do they have the right to threaten a university professor as thought police
In my book in New Jersey where they have found in their testing severe error rates that would collapse the world banking system in a day if these same rates were found. I have heard these are the same machines that were not certified in California.
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index....xml&coll=1
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index....xml&coll=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/opinion/...amp;oref=slogin
As an Engineer I can say that designing a voting machine are about as simple as simple gets. That in my book there is nothing worthy of the so intellectual property claims they are making. These are for heavens sakes counters that add….. any c average college programmer could easily make a working system. There is nothing here that is rocket science. So the claim of intellectual property in my book is nothing but a smoke screen. If they had a bullet proof black box there is nothing that an outsider could do, just like ATMs that are out open to complete vulnerability day in day out.
In my book in New Jersey where they have found in their testing severe error rates that would collapse the world banking system in a day if these same rates were found. I have heard these are the same machines that were not certified in California.
QUOTE
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,143628-c...ts/article.html
http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9897597-38.html?tag=newsmap
On Tuesday, Felten posted e-mail he and fellow Princeton professor Andrew Appel received from Sequoia saying:
As you have likely read in the news media, certain New Jersey election officials have stated that they plan to send to you one or more Sequoia Advantage voting machines for analysis. I want to make you aware that if the County does so, it violates their established Sequoia licensing Agreement for use of the voting system. Sequoia has also retained counsel to stop any infringement of our intellectual properties, including any non-compliant analysis. We will also take appropriate steps to protect against any publication of Sequoia software, its behavior, reports regarding same or any other infringement of our intellectual property.
http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9897597-38.html?tag=newsmap
On Tuesday, Felten posted e-mail he and fellow Princeton professor Andrew Appel received from Sequoia saying:
As you have likely read in the news media, certain New Jersey election officials have stated that they plan to send to you one or more Sequoia Advantage voting machines for analysis. I want to make you aware that if the County does so, it violates their established Sequoia licensing Agreement for use of the voting system. Sequoia has also retained counsel to stop any infringement of our intellectual properties, including any non-compliant analysis. We will also take appropriate steps to protect against any publication of Sequoia software, its behavior, reports regarding same or any other infringement of our intellectual property.
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index....xml&coll=1
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index....xml&coll=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/opinion/...amp;oref=slogin
As an Engineer I can say that designing a voting machine are about as simple as simple gets. That in my book there is nothing worthy of the so intellectual property claims they are making. These are for heavens sakes counters that add….. any c average college programmer could easily make a working system. There is nothing here that is rocket science. So the claim of intellectual property in my book is nothing but a smoke screen. If they had a bullet proof black box there is nothing that an outsider could do, just like ATMs that are out open to complete vulnerability day in day out.
Is there a neutral position post with information with a question for debate somewhere I missed? What are you talking about here, inventor?
QUOTE(scubatim @ Mar 23 2008, 04:21 PM)
Is there a neutral position post with information with a question for debate somewhere I missed? What are you talking about here, inventor?
I don't know how adequate they are and this topic doesn't whet my appetite, but in fairness to inventor, he does have some questions at the top of the text, not at the bottom where people usually put them.
The questions are:
1. When do the rights of a company over weigh the security of democracy?
2. Is intellectual property a valid argument or a sham in this case?
3. Do they have the right to threaten a university professor as thought police?
When do the rights of a company over weigh the security of democracy?
The company has no rights, the individual citizens who own the company have rights. Securing those rights is the job of a democracy.
Is intellectual property a valid argument or a sham in this case? Its not the argument being made. The argument is a contractural one. The county signed a contract, nuff said. If they're so concerned about securing democracy (a worthy concern I must note), they should simply stop using the machines.
they have the right to threaten a university professor as thought police?
Not thought police, simply protecting their contracts. The county made a bad contract, they should renegotiate. If the county refuses to rengegotiate, then the county commisioners should be booted by their constitutents. Bringing the police power of the state to bear in order to violate the contract is wrong.
The company has no rights, the individual citizens who own the company have rights. Securing those rights is the job of a democracy.
Is intellectual property a valid argument or a sham in this case? Its not the argument being made. The argument is a contractural one. The county signed a contract, nuff said. If they're so concerned about securing democracy (a worthy concern I must note), they should simply stop using the machines.
they have the right to threaten a university professor as thought police?
Not thought police, simply protecting their contracts. The county made a bad contract, they should renegotiate. If the county refuses to rengegotiate, then the county commisioners should be booted by their constitutents. Bringing the police power of the state to bear in order to violate the contract is wrong.
QUOTE(Bikerdad @ Mar 23 2008, 10:32 PM)
When do the rights of a company over weigh the security of democracy?
The company has no rights, the individual citizens who own the company have rights. Securing those rights is the job of a democracy.
Is intellectual property a valid argument or a sham in this case? Its not the argument being made. The argument is a contractural one. The county signed a contract, nuff said. If they're so concerned about securing democracy (a worthy concern I must note), they should simply stop using the machines.
they have the right to threaten a university professor as thought police?
Not thought police, simply protecting their contracts. The county made a bad contract, they should renegotiate. If the county refuses to rengegotiate, then the county commisioners should be booted by their constitutents. Bringing the police power of the state to bear in order to violate the contract is wrong.
wrong a company does have rights as determined by the supreme court. So do we have a democracy if a corporation determines the vote count?The company has no rights, the individual citizens who own the company have rights. Securing those rights is the job of a democracy.
Is intellectual property a valid argument or a sham in this case? Its not the argument being made. The argument is a contractural one. The county signed a contract, nuff said. If they're so concerned about securing democracy (a worthy concern I must note), they should simply stop using the machines.
they have the right to threaten a university professor as thought police?
Not thought police, simply protecting their contracts. The county made a bad contract, they should renegotiate. If the county refuses to rengegotiate, then the county commisioners should be booted by their constitutents. Bringing the police power of the state to bear in order to violate the contract is wrong.
It is the argument, they say that intellectual property will be
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index....xml&coll=1
QUOTE
Sequoia threatened to sue Union County if Rajoppi turned over voting machines to Princeton Universityprofessor Edward Felten for analysis. Sequoia executives said the study would violate the terms of their licensing agreement and put their "trade secrets" at risk.
the purpose of the licensing is to protect their trade secrets. as I said this is ridiculous, this is a project that is so simple to write. it is a simple counting machine... I can not think of a much simpler program. so the so called trade secrets are just a total sham. to not have real open review is a security risk of national importance.. The reason I say thought police is until a crime is committed you can not take action on it. why is a company threatening anyone... specially a university... they can threaten the owner all they want. and hopefully the owner will sue for a fraudulent product and get a court order to have it independently investigated.
QUOTE
wrong a company does have rights as determined by the supreme court. So do we have a democracy if a corporation determines the vote count
?Again the “government” bought a product _ NOT the IP. They can test the hell out of it or just not buy it but they don’t get the IP. So what is your problem? Are we back to the “machines are all fixed” rant?
FYI – the government buys things to a spec and they are required to have multiple bids and they can look all they want at the hardware test the system but no IP. And they are testing – as they should. From your link:
“Shafer said Kwaidan Consulting is expected to complete its test soon and deliver a report simultaneously to her firm and the state attorney general. Furthermore, she said Wyle Labs, a federally sanc tioned voting machine testing laboratory, is now examining the latest software Sequoia designed for New Jersey's machines to make sure the problem does not occur again.”
Inventor, the "rights" of a corporation are derived from the rights of the owners. No owners, no corporation, no rights. It seems as though you want to strip individuals of their intellectual property rights if they have the audacity to incorporate. That is a remarkably odd tack for someone with your screenname to take. 
If the county thinks there is criminal activity going on, then they should get a judge to issue a criminal search warrant. Otherwise, they must abide by the contract into which they voluntarily entered.
If the county thinks there is criminal activity going on, then they should get a judge to issue a criminal search warrant. Otherwise, they must abide by the contract into which they voluntarily entered.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.