A bit geeky, but this is good news!

[Bill Bored]

OK, here's the version for those who don't follow this crap:

A vendor shill who gets to write voting systems standards for the whole damn country (with the EAC's blessing of course) is being investigated by the IEEE because some of the good guys, who are also IEEE members, wrote to them and complained. If the bad guy is sacked, this could mean there will be less opposition to voting system standards that require auditability, reliability and that sort of thing.

So, 3 cheers for the good guys!:toast:

<http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2257&Itemid=26>

Voting System Standards: An Exchange with the IEEE

By Justin Moore and Jeremy Epstein, IEEE members

February 12, 2007

One of the most high-profile engineering issues facing the public today is that of designing, building, and testing electronic voting systems. Just this month the front page of the New York Times carried the story of the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) temporarily revoking the certification-granting credentials of a electronic voting
system testing lab. The whirlwind surrounding this issue will only grow as the 2008 elections approach.

We, the IEEE, should be a leader in this area, and on paper it appears that we are. The 2005 Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) adopted by the EAC was written almost entirely based on the work of the IEEE Voting Equipment Standards Project (P1583). The IEEE has a member on the EAC Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC).

-snip-

However, in reality through these channels we have done nothing but put an official face on entirely insufficient standards and procedures. While the list is long, the most recent instance is one of the most egregious. In December our representative to the TGDC cast the deciding vote against the eminently reasonable recommendations of NIST. These recommendations focused on software independence (SI); in essence, the official voice of the IEEE declared that it was unreasonable to ask the vendors to create a system whose
results could be verified by means other than the vendor's own software. The leadership ability -- and the very reputation -- of the IEEE has suffered as a result.

-snip-

The IEEE Response

Dear Mr. Moore and Mr. Epstein,

-snip-

In investigating your complaint, we have learned that the IEEE-SA Board of Governors, which convenes in late February, will be deliberating on this particular situation and on the representation issue in general. Further, a detailed report from the current IEEE representative on the EAC Technical Guidelines Development Committee
is expected.

Thank you again for bringing this matter to the attention of the IEEE Presidents.

Sincerely,

Leah H. Jamieson
2007 IEEE President and CEO

[Bill Bored]

1. Who's sending me these stupid heart thingies anyway?

Secret admirers, show yourselves! (Provided I go that way!)

[Buzz Clik]

2. You're right on both counts: good news and geeky.

But, hells bells, if you weren't geeky, you wouldn't be a EE.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

3. thanks for posting that, Justin helped NC, Jeremy is helping VA

these are extraordinary guys.

Justin was THE computer scientist expert that our lawmakers in
NC listened to.

We were very fortunate to have him in NC, guiding the lawmakers
and us- in writing our legislation and defending it.

If it weren't for Justin, the lawmakers would likely have
written us off as conspiracy nuts.

Here is his voting information page, great stuff:
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~justin/voting/index.html

OH, AND WE DIDN'T PAY HIM A DIME (WISH WE COULD HAVE).

[Bill Bored]

7. Yes they are!

There were a few others working behind the scenes on this one too who shall remain nameless.

[Wilms]

4. .

:loveya::loveya::loveya::loveya:

[troubleinwinter]

5. One more "thank you" and anther K & R.

[Morgana LaFey]

6. IEEE is Engineeers, in case anyone didn't know.

I barely know it. :evilgrin:

Yeah, that is good news.