Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> Diebold Weighs Strategy for Voting Unit
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| Diebold Inc. saw great potential in the modernization of elections
>| equipment. Now, analysts say, executives may be angling for ways
>| to dump its e-voting subsidiary that's widely seen as tarnishing
>| the company's reputation.
> `----
>
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DIEBOLD_VOTING?SITE=WIRE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
>
This does show the risks associated with programming on Windows,
particularly where security and integrity are important.
>
> Related:
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| "Nineteen machines had 21 screen freezes or system crashes, producing a
>| blue screen and messages about an "illegal operation" or a "fatal
>| exception error."
>|
>| "Especially with this blue-screen problem, you don't know whether it's
>| the printer drivers, you don't know whether it's Diebold's own code or
>| whether it's Windows,"
> `----
>
> http://www.verifiedvotingfoundation.org/article.php?id=6257
>
Except a blue-screen should not take the machine down. Were Windows
properly architected, then the Blue Screen of Death would be a Blue
Screen of Segment Violation and Process Restart, BSOS-VIPR, or beesos
viper. The process would restart statefully, and everything would
continue, without any significant glitches in user throughput or voting
integrity.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
