And another one turns
Remember the site www.electronic-voting.org that I blogged about a while back? Well there must be something in the water as the author of that site has... guessed what? Devised an evoting system!
This makes the 3rd sceptic who's developing / distributing an evoting system, which seems to be a growing trend; attack the existing suppliers with your own product alongside.
Our friend Mr Kitcat has spoken up in defense of Emanuele Lombardi before, I wonder what he'd think of these lovely little lines:
The process for making such software is named ClearSoftware® and it is patented together with ClearVoting®
Since ClearSoftware® is patented, its details are not shown here
So Emanuele has come up with the perfect system for ensuring transparency and trust in a software system, but wouldn't publicly reveal details of it! I need to get me a patent like that.
2 comments:
Daniel,
as I state in ClearVoting home page, I didn't change my mind about e-voting:
===== excerpt from the home page
It's more than four years that I fight e-voting because it is dangerous for democracy. My site www.electronic-vote.org is devoted to explain the reasons why, for voting, paper is better than bytes. I'm not the only one against electronic voting, in fact all over the world many groups and organizazions fight the use of electronic voting.
But while we all talk against e-voting, companies sell electronic voting machines and people vote using them.
As an example on May 6th, 2007 some 1.5 millions of French voted electronically.
I'm not sure that we'll be able to halt the use of computers in voting. Big companies are lobbying, most of the public opinion don't see the peril and politicians, those not interested in making electoral fraud, are probably more ignorant about computers than common people.
So, probably, the best thing to do is to ride the tiger, that is to have an electronic voting system in which computing is at its minimum level and thus its behaviour can be easily and truly verified. This is exactly what ClearVoting® is.
======== end of excerpt
ClarSoftware is only a method of
writing, producing, publishing, distributing, installing and running software that ensures the total absence of any computing tricks that could produce unwanted results and that allows the easy verification of such absence to anybody with a small knowledge of computing.
ClearSoftware® is not only applications software but also the whole operating environment in which they are executed
If we assume ClearSoftware works as I claim, it seems to me that ClearVoting has no problem. Or not?
Emanuele Lombardi
Hi Emanuele,
I'm a little surprised that you're asserting you didn't change your mind when you've quite clearly contradicted yourself in your comments.
Did you object to evoting for 4 years and then decide to build an evoting system yourself? If you did, then you've changed your mind.
Moving on, I'm intrigued about ClearSoftware to say the least. Have you already secured a patent on this process, as your website states it's both patent pending / patented. Either way could you publish some details of the methodology you've produced? Having patent pending / patent status will protect your IPR from unauthorised reproduction. You've spoken before about the impossibility of being able to verify computer systems as being valid, yet have suddenly come up with the perfect solution, excuse me if I call snake oil on that.
Post a Comment