Mildly hyperbolic, but not in every case.

But how do you not see an issue with foreign companies getting involved in US elections?

Because I know that systems can be changed after they're made and shipped.

You should know they are just giving you closed source hardware and executables. They can do whatever the hell they please in the code/schematics.

Nothing is truly closed-source, just made more difficult to interpret.

Voting machines are simple though.

In the scope of things.

Yea, you're going to disasemble the executable back to asembly and figure out the C code from it? Yeah no.

How would they even get access to the executable? It's probably an arm mcu running an rtos with some simple code running. So use Programmer from to read out the binary and them use the disassembler?

Who the hell would do that

We should demand they make their git repo public and use open source only going forward.

Debuggers primarily, there are people that are very, very good at reading assembly.

Particularly those that the governments love to contract/hire.

Same reason you can make keygens.

Which require reading assembly.

Fun things, making keygens. There are legal challenges all over the place for keygenmes.

Because they're so fun.

They're puzzles.

I've done 3.

An example of the comment section.

> And a "lack of security" isn't the same as "intentionally committing fraud"
@Maw
Of course it isn't. You stated that you thought Americans would vet election software. My response was regarding that some states did and found it wanting.

I believe that there is beyond a reasonable doubt that the systemic election fraud was intentional.

Wow. That is a gigantic leap followed by a nonsquitur flourish. 10/10 gold medal.

Some states found it wanting. Therefore systemic, intentional election fraud...beyond a reasonable doubt, no less. Stunning.

Intentional, AND perpetrated by other country's governments on top of that. From what evidence?

Because the software was made somewhere besides the US?

That's not really proof of anything.

Forgot about also perpetrated by foreign entities. Apologies. I was racing.

This is like saying because our phones are made in China, the US government can't tamper with them.

It's ridiculous.

There is also the evidence that a bunch of people don't like the outcome.

> Some states found it wanting. Therefore systemic, intentional election fraud...beyond a reasonable doubt, no less. Stunning.
@Zuluzeit
The software is capable of being hacked, from what I heard easily.

I believe that there is always a desire for one or both dudes to cheat on a presidential election.

I believe if one side purposely removes the obstacles to cheating prior to, blocks reasonable and legal observation, and so on..

I don't really think it's a leap at all.

I don't care where the software was made, I bet trump doesn't either, Russiagate have great cover for his eo.

Pile of cash in a box. Flimsy lock. Everyone likes cash. Therefore theft.

Being dissatisfied with the amount of cash in the box plus that it was possible to steal isn't good enough to claim someone stole...all this while knowing next to nothing about the box, lock or how much was actually in there.

It's a facile analogy but I think it adequately captures my point.

*along with who did it and that it is beyond a reasonable doubt

I think it's safe to say there is always going to be attempted fraud in elections, and that it's good to root it out.

What is not good, however: Is making grandiose assumptions about who did it and assumptions that it completely invalidates an election by itself for simply existing.

Pointing the finger at other countries is about as bad as you could handle it in my opinion.

...that skips over the burden of establishing that something happened in the first place

I think we can safely assume due to the scope of it, at least one instance of voter fraud occurred.

Kind of the same way we can safely assume life on another planet exists.

It's about probability.

Probability and scope.