[ExI] Immaculate Election

[Stuart LaForge]

Quoting Dave Sill <sparge at gmail.com>:

> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 12:49 AM Stuart LaForge via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> I think a class-action lawsuit against Diebold et al on behalf of the
>> American people would do wonders to bring this issue to the attention
>> of the American public even if it gets thrown out of court. It would
>> at least distract people from the strange message that the competing
>> narratives have in common, and that is that conservatives and liberals
>> are supposed to hate one another so much as to cause all political
>> discourse devolve to shouting and name calling. Followed soon after
>> with a closure of communication channels. The political parties are
>> blaming one another for fraud due to mistrust caused by the voting
>> machines even in the absence of any evidence of fraud. That is a
>> design flaw inherent in the machines and shows negligence on the part
>> of the developers.
>>
>
> The voting machines aren't the problem. The current rage-addicted divisive
> political environment is the problem.

Complex misunderstood technology like social media platforms that have  
algorithms that sequester you into echo chambers is responsible for  
the rage-addicted divisive political environment. And while this year  
it might be conspiracy theorists on the lunatic fringe crying foul on  
the election, in 2016 it was well-heeled statisticians and  
mathematicians who were complaining about a huge discrepancy between  
exit polls and election results. People tend to have short memories  
and only implicate voting machine fraud when their side loses. We need  
to make it so that any yahoo with a smartphone can check verify that  
the election was fair.

> Whereas any actual fraud would be apt to use backdoors or zero day
>> exploits that would most likely be known to the developers and
>> vendors, again making them liable.
>
> Vendors don't know about zero-day vulnerabilities or they'd fix them. They
> may know about back doors.

Vendors usually find find out about zero-day vulnerabilities well  
ahead of the general voting public which is why they push out software  
patches without being asked to by the end-users.

>
>> Plus suing the developers and
>> vendors of the machines themselves might flush out any other culprits
>> based on who moves to block.
>>
>
> Suing them for what, exactly? Having bugs isn't illegal. Not fixing bugs
> that they've been made aware of isn't illegal. Maybe it should be, but it's
> not.

False advertising perhaps? Obviously, they made their sales by  
claiming that their technology was superior to paper ballots when any  
guy with minimal education can audit paper ballots but only the elite  
can audit voting machines. Lack of transparency is negligence when it  
comes to voting machines. Remember the goal here is not necessarily to  
win the lawsuit but to bring this issue before the American people in  
a way that can't be swept under the rug by the media. The news cannot  
hide that every American who voted got a notice in the mail that they  
may be entitled to a couple of dollars in compensation because voting  
machine developers can't PROVE that the election wasn't stolen.

> Maybe the blame should be on the government officials who buy voting
> machines from vendors who aren't committed to transparency and security.

Most assuredly that where the blame SHOULD lie. Unfortunately  
governments have sovereign immunity to lawsuits except for very  
specific offenses that are codified into law. Lack of election  
transparency is unfortunately not one of those offenses. Even though  
the goal is not to win the lawsuit, it has to get its day in court to  
accomplish its aim.

Stuart LaForge