Gambling Machines Much Safer Than Electronic Voting Machines
from the protecting-what's-important dept
It appears that making sure gambling is fair is much more important than making sure our elections are fair. One of the defenses pulled out by those who want to keep going with existing electronic voting machines is that no one seems to complain about electronic gambling machines. Perhaps that’s because electronic gambling machines are held to a much higher standard than electronic voting machines. This NY Times editorial lists six different ways in which gambling machines in Nevada are under much more scrutiny than electronic voting machines. These include things like the fact that the state requires copies of the source code of all electronic gambling software, as well as their stringent licensing procedure for any company that wishes to sell electronic gambling machines. Employees of any such company have to go through background checks to make sure they have no criminal record. Considering that Diebold had convicted felons involved with their electronic voting systems – you wonder if a similar licensing procedure might make sense for voting machines as well.
Comments on “Gambling Machines Much Safer Than Electronic Voting Machines”
No Subject Given
you wonder if a similar licensing procedure might make sense for voting machines
So we are basically ruling out any Open source development here ?
Re: No Subject Given
I don’t think so, according to the original post. It just said employees of companies selling the machines have to pass background checks. It didn’t say they couldn’t use open-source code they had obtained from non-employees. They should probably be required to review and vouch for all code they use in machines they sell, though.