(no subject)

[fabrisse]

I don't think of Foxtrot as a particularly political cartoon, but I like this one.

By the way, why is it that the geeks I know all understand why there must be a papertrail, but many of the non-computer people don't? Is it a variation on computers are magic/perfect?

Comments

[mecurtin.livejournal.com]

I think it must be.

This may be a unique example of a situation where a new technology is introduced and the people in that industry are the ones most opposed to its use. You'd think that would raise a huge warning flag right there, but apparently nooooo.

[fabrisse.livejournal.com]

Well, back when I was a spanking new database programmer, I wrote a program that crashed the entire company system. It took six hours to repair it, and then someone got the bright idea of testing the individual components without reading the code and crashed the entire system again. This time it only took two hours to repair.

The error was mine. It came from one line of code out in a three hundred line program, and one of the senior programmers had suggested that line of code as a solution to another problem I was having. As long as it worked alone -- the only testing that I did -- it was fine. It was using it in conjunction with something else that was running as part of the wider program that caused the problem.

Essentially, that company lost 2/3 of a day's profits because I made a mistake.

Heaven help us with undocumented electronic voting.

Good to see you in my LJ. *g*

[alexx-kay.livejournal.com]

Geeks either are, or at least personally know, hackers. And pretty much *all* geeks have personal experience with computers doing unexpected, buggy things, even without hacking involved.

[fabrisse.livejournal.com]

So people who just interact with their ATM and see that it works, don't know enough to be critical. OK.

[siderea]

Yeah, it is, but worse than that. To a non-techie, when you say "this technology can't be trusted", it calls into question ALL technology -- which is too terrifyingly Crichtonesque to be confronted. They don't have the conceptual categories in their minds that someone who works with technology does, to see where the limits of what is being warned about ends. For them, the voting machine, the ATM, their home computer, the computer in their car, the Air Control computers, the phone company and their refrigerator are all one.

[fabrisse.livejournal.com]

Aaah. Yes. That makes it worse. If you own a phone, you've had at least one problem with your bill. It worries me that the non-techie can't extrapolate from "&*^%$ phone company mis-charging me!" to "hmmm, maybe we should have a way to check on the election."

[pamelina.livejournal.com]

What scares me is the thought of somebody hacking into them after the voting to change the results, and us not having a paper trail to catch them out at that. Even the non-geekies often believe in conspiracy theories. It ought to be simple: warn the Republicans about the sneaky Democrats and vice-versa.

[fabrisse.livejournal.com]

The Republicans are happy with the new machines at least partially because the maker of the ones to be used in Florida is a heavy Republican contributor. Doesn't that ease your conspiracy worries?

For some reason, the people who are warning us about the dangers of "the Internets" to quote Bush at the debate, don't seem to see hackers as anything more than wayward teenagers.

*sigh*