> I disagree with almost all the comments I have read on this topic.
> It is impossible to verify with certainty
> that any non-trivial program will work as expected.
> You can study the code until you are blue in the face,
> and there will still be simple logical errors in it.
> When an error was found in the Pentium chip,
> how many times had it been tested?
> Billions, probably trillions, of times.
>> But this isn't the end of the world,
> as long as there is a reasonably simple way
> of determining if something has gone wrong.
>> If the worst comes to the worst,
> and it seems reasonably likely that an error has occurred in a vote,
> the vote can always be held again -
> as would happen now if for example
> a car carrying the votes was involved in an accident,
> causing the ballot-papers to be scattered.
>> In my opinion it is a waste of time and money
> to test the e-voting machines more than they have been tested.
I would have been happy if they simply posted the code on their website.
Not that I would actually review it myself, but I would be sure thousands
of others would ;--0
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!