Re: Reviving EVM2003

From: Ed Kennedy <ekennedyx_at_yahoo_dot_com>
Date: Sun Jul 18 2004 - 13:39:03 CDT

Hello All:

    This sounds like a great idea. Just one caveat: Let's stay, as much as
possible, with imaginary, dead or fantasy candidates and positions as
before. Perhaps it would be best in the case of the dead to adopt the US
Postal Service guidelines that the honoree be deceased for at least 10
years. I understand that I'm contradicting Liam's suggestion and some
things I've written lately but right now everyone is very polarized with the
elections coming up soon.

Thanks, Ed Kennedy

----- Original Message -----
From: "Liam Helmer" <lists@strongboxlinux.com>
To: "voting-project" <voting-project@lists.sonic.net>
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 3:36 AM
Subject: Re: [voting-project] Reviving EVM2003

> Well, I'd certainly be happy to see us moving more on this!
> I think I had feedback from *1* person on the EVMix CD... the interest
> was so little that I've simply been working on other things.
>
> IMHO, funding is a lot easier if you have a product...
> That's the approach that I've been taking with my work! (or, in academic
> terms "publish or perish").
>
> For instance, the relatively minor changes involved in getting the
> EVM2003 software to actually work from a read-only medium would be a
> great start as far as I'm concerned! In fact, that would probably be
> enough for me to be able to get a working CD out and available. The
> changes essentially amount to being able to pass variables or parameters
> to the programs that contain the names of the ballot files, or locations
> of where they should save information -> with a CD-Rom, much of your
> name-space is read-only, and read-write portions of the namespace are
> "expensive" in real terms.
>
> Cheers,
> Liam
>
> On Sun, 2004-07-18 at 02:28, David Mertz wrote:
> > On Jul 17, 2004, at 9:42 PM, Nathan L. Adams wrote:
> > > ...it is hard to get a serious Free/Open Source Software
> > > project going, and it can apparently be even harder to *keep one
> > > going*.
> > > 1) Don't discourage work as being not needed with promises of
> > > grants/funding/whatever being "just around the corner".
> > > 2) Don't discourage work as being not needed because "we'll soon have
> > > an army
> > > of graduate students to do that". Armies of graduate students are
> > > generally
> > > good for one or two purposes: earning their Masters degrees and
> > > keeping their
> > > professors gainfully employed, IMHO. At the very least, an army of
grad
> >
> > Indeed. I quite agree with the harmful loss of focus for EVM2003. I
> > also think the chasing after funding by some OVC members has had almost
> > as much of a down side as an up side... a lot of threads that really
> > need to be pursued in EVM2003 have been dropped (or postponed, anyway):
> > generalizing the source code to generic ballots; testing and fixing
> > the live-CD Liam did a good job of packaging (at least as an alpha
> > version); stamping out those various known bugs that remain in the
> > demo; making the whole thing easier to download; getting the latest
> > code checked in; etc.
> >
> > I feel bad about all this, since I should have made some efforts to
> > keep EVM2003 alive (I'm not the only one who might do so... but I'm one
> > likely candidate). Not to say it cannot be resuscitated still, of
> > course, but it's dormant at least. I went off in my own directions
> > too... some with the Harvard conference, some with the academic papers,
> > some with getting OVC onto IBM developerWorks, and--oh yeah--some work
> > that actually pays me money, so I can pay my bills.
> >
> > And now I'm on vacation for a week, and have some articles due as soon
> > as I come back. But at the start of August, I will try to make a real
> > effort to bring EVM2003 back to more active status. Probably first
> > thing is starting a new clearly purposed developers list, called
> > something like EVM2003-DEV to clearly differentiate it from OVC and
> > from any University projects that may (or may not) get funded. And
> > after that, get people together to do the various things I mention
> > above--and the other ones that I have not thought of, but that our
> > other excellent developers have more clearly in mind.
> >
> > Yours, David...
> --
> ----------
>
> StrongBox Linux
> http://www.strongboxlinux.com
> "Making Security Friendly"
>
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Sat Jul 31 23:17:06 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jul 31 2004 - 23:17:15 CDT