RE: TED SELKER: US Election Assistance Commissio n--Questions

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Mon May 10 2004 - 21:06:41 CDT

At 9:25 PM -0400 5/10/04, Popkin, Laird (WMG Corp) wrote:
>Ted Selker's theory is that an audiotape has a number of advantages
>over paper. It's easier to store and handle a cassette tape than a
>stack of paper. It's hardware to manipulate a tape than a stack of
>paper. And it's easier to record onto cassette tape than to print
>out and handle paper.
>
>These arguments are all true. But somehow it seems like a "crazy"
>idea. Perhaps I'm getting old?
>
>Ted doesn't address the privacy issues of the tape being sequential.
>I can't think of a meaningful way to address that -- if you
>reshuffle the recordings on the tape, you've eliminated the value of
>the tape as a "true" recording of the voting. Perhaps his answer
>would be that you lose that privacy? Of course, the tape doesn't
>record the time between voters, so there's some protection there,
>somewhat.

The biggest problem with the audio tape is there is no feasible
automated way to reconcile the tape against the computerized vote
records.

Best regards,
Arthur

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
==================================================================
= 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 23:17:32 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:16 CDT