Fwd: Re: "dumb scanners"

From: Jerry Lobdill <lobdillj_at_charter_dot_net>
Date: Thu Dec 07 2006 - 14:33:14 CST

>But there needs to be only one "dumb scanner" (under officials' control) to
>avoid invading privacy by scanning voters' fingerprints, ballot serial
>numbers, etc. The "dumb scanner" can mis-scan in the same way as existing
>all-in-one scanners, so we still need sampling hand audits. I'm not sure that
>this approach solves much, but at least it appears to preserve privacy.

How would the scanner pick up invisible fingerprints?


OVC-discuss mailing list
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Sun Dec 31 23:17:09 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Dec 31 2006 - 23:17:16 CST