First, my qualifications. I've written over a million lines of code in the last 42 years, including nationwide systems for companies whose names you would recognize instantly. I have been granted quite a few patents on systems containing software and algorithms for solving real-world problems. This is my job and life, and I do it five or more days a week, sometimes lying awake at night designing those systems and algorithms in my head while the hours tick by. Ask my wife. There are many, many engineers like me in the U.S., engineers who do this because they love it.
And in every election, when I shove my ballot into an electronic
voting machine, or touch the screen to vote, I feel nauseated because I cannot
see what's behind the algorithmic curtain.
You see, the great thing about
software is that you can have a chunk of expensive electronic and mechanical
hardware sitting there, and you can easily change the function of it with a
simple software update. That makes my life easier as a developer,
but it's a hideous feature when applied to voting machines because they are
systems critical to our republic that should not be easily corrupted.
Let me list just some of the
ways one could engage in election cheating by fiddling with
software:
- Change the voting ratio between two candidates by any
fraction
- Display an entered vote correctly to the voter, then
change the vote before tabulation
- Display a summary of votes to an election official,
and change that total later
- Allow remote modification of vote totals via the
internet or local WiFi
- Change votes or methods at a certain time of day, or
at a later date, even after voting machine certification concludes, or
before/during auditing
- Change votes in a random fashion on election day to
make it appear to be a legitimate voting trend
- Change voting trends by precinct, or using historical
voting statistics
- Update the software secretly with a new algorithm
- Provide intermediate vote tallies to remote actors who
are gaming the election in other ways
- Make adjustments to the votes of one candidate and
tracking adjustments to other candidates down ballot
Any cheat you could do with a paper ballot becomes extremely easy
with an electronic voting machine, plus a lot more. Want dead people to
vote? You don't need to dig up their identification or voter
registration card; just program the machine to register 1.02 Biden votes for
every actual vote. So every 50 Biden votes result in one nonexistent
person voting Biden as well. That's 2% that costs you no visits to
the cemetery or morgue.
You see, the problem with software-based voting machines is not the
software or the design of the machines, but rather the integrity of the
designers. If the designers are crooks, then your election is hosed.
This is the problem with artificial intelligence (A.I.) as
well. A.I. could be a very cool adjunct to help us through life, but
unfortunately, many software coders today grew up in amoral California or
amoral socialist countries, and these people have zero moral inhibition writing
A.I. code that conducts Big Tech criminal activity.
Behind every dishonest voting machine is a pile of dishonest
programmers who have no moral inhibitions against giving local and regional
politicians the tools they need to steal elections. And these highly
intelligent idiots don't consider for a minute that those same tools could be
used by the government against their side when they fall out of
favor. Software geeks are pretty smart in many ways and quite stupid
in many others. I don't trust them with my future or my government. Should
you?
A reader will retort that the voting machines should use open
source code, so the good geeks can examine what's happening behind the
curtain. That won't prevent bad geeks from modifying voting machine
code on the day of the election, or even after, to change vote totals. Not
every problem has a competent and honest solution in software.
Common sense tells us that the best voting system uses a
mechanical method to mark a ballot in a clear way (such as pen and
paper). This method allows the ballots to be securely archived in
case of disputes. While hand-counting and protecting ballots can be
labor-intensive, it's possible to have high confidence in the
outcome. With software-based voting systems, your vote is at the
mercy of some group of geeks, perhaps in another country, who have no respect
for your life or your vote. Due to the social media
sewer, they most likely have only hatred for conservative Americans and your
vote.
I'm not anti-technology, but I'm anti–bad technology and against
inappropriate use of technology. Electronic voting
qualifies. It seems like the smarter we get in creating amazing
tools and systems the dumber we get in using them. (Of course, all the above
applies as well to COVID statistics.)
We can put these genius idiots out of business by taking control
of local government voter organizations. Ready to get to work?
