Re: Alternatives to a single bar code

From: Alan Dechert <alan_at_openvotingconsortium_dot_org>
Date: Wed May 05 2004 - 12:27:38 CDT


> Perhaps the OVC can manage that process. The UC-based research
> project will build a single series of reference implementations for a
> one or two hardware reference configurations. If there are a myriad
> of certified configurations, then the OVC will need to do that.
> After all, the proposal to the California Secretary of State will
> have the subcontractor to UCSC arrange to have the software federally
> and state certified as necessary for use in an election.
That's right! There are 50 states with 2219 counties, plus 4 territories,
and so on.... What the OVC is proposing is a very big messy project. We
need lots and lots of money to pull it off.

As we speak, the EAC hearings are going on:

"As the United States Election Assistance Commission (EAC) prepares to
$2.3 billion dollars in grants to States for upgrading election equipment,
it has
scheduled a public hearing to receive information on the use, security and
of electronic voting devices."
(I combined the news release and the hearing agenda)

The likes of Kevin Shelley and Conny McCormack are sitting on a panel at
this very moment. It would have been nice to be there. However, Doug Jones
did write up something for them that I'm sure was good for open voting. I
want to know what Avi Rubin had to say.

The big vendors are there to try to grab money. That's fine. They can have
some as long as there is some for R&D--10% would be nice. We could even do
well with 1%.

Alan D.
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Mon May 31 23:17:15 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:15 CDT