Linked by Howard Fosdick on Thu 8th Nov 2012 20:12 UTC
Permalink for comment 541728
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-22
How simple is that?
It's not just simple, it is also secure (if there are representatives of all parties viewing the counting process and better use a ball-pen or something else that is not erasable). And everyone (not just computer experts) can understand how it works and why it is secure. It can be recounted. There is no simple large scale undetectable manipulation through statistical fraud algorithms possible. No expensive computer hardware that needs expensive care. If it takes a bit longer to get the count, that is a cheap prize for democracy.