Sign the petition - eliminate computerized drawings!
January 22, 2004
|Posted: September 1, 2004, 10:21 pm - IP Logged|
If this were a petition to protest computerized voting, I would sign it.
It's strange that we can get passionate about our lottery numbers, but not our votes. When enough elections are fixed, we wouldn't need to worry too much about the meaning of our petitions.
Chief Bottle Washer
May 31, 2000
|Posted: September 1, 2004, 11:22 pm - IP Logged|
As a fellow NJ resident, we don't have computerized voting - there is a physical card behind the scenes, even when you push buttons to vote. I don't see the problem.
January 22, 2004
|Posted: September 2, 2004, 12:04 am - IP Logged|
Not in Mercer County. There is no receipt here.
I intend to vote write in because unlike most Americans I happen to know history. Stalin's remark, "it's not how people vote that matters, what matter is who counts the votes," rings truer than ever. Not only can votes be changed, but they can be hacked.
I cannot believe that people wrapping themselves in the flag are trying to stop HR2239 to provide each American with a written ballot. When Diebold owns your vote, we are no less doomed than were the folks in Stalin's time in Stalin's country.
Chief Bottle Washer
May 31, 2000
|Posted: September 2, 2004, 12:44 am - IP Logged|
You don't get a receipt in any county, but I thought you were talking about computerized voting, rather than getting a receipt. The issue is whether the voting machine records your vote on a piece of paper (which can be audited), or if it merely exists as bytes in a computer database, with no physical record.
I don't really understand the receipt thing that you're talking about, because even if you punched holes out of a card, or pulled a lever (which we used to do in NJ), you still wouldn't get a receipt.
When did you EVER get a receipt showing who you voted for?!
In New Jersey, your vote can't be "hacked", since the machine makes a physical recording of your choice. It's like a punchcard, except much more accurate and secure. I simply don't understand what your problem with the voting system in NJ is.
If your criticism was about the new Florida system, then you may have a point, since their new system only records your choice in the computer, not on a piece of paper.
Also, a write-in ballot is only effective in local races, and maybe in extremely rare cases on the state level.
On a presidential election, with its sheer size and the electoral college system, write-in ballots have absolutely zero chance of impact. I would never throw my vote away by writing in a candidate for president. What's the point of staging a write-in protest vote, when it has zero chance of impact, and you're the only one who knows you're protesting?
April 3, 2004
|Posted: September 8, 2004, 7:20 pm - IP Logged|
February 4, 2004
|Posted: September 9, 2004, 2:19 am - IP Logged|
I am on board also, thanks for keeping us posted on this important issue!
way to go todd!
April 15, 2002
|Posted: September 12, 2004, 7:44 pm - IP Logged|
Signed sealed and delivered!!!
Time is a wonderful teacher, but it kills all its students.
A man must consider what a rich realm he leaves when he becomes a conformist.
May 23, 2004
|Posted: September 23, 2004, 10:09 pm - IP Logged|
the only difference between me and a millionaire is six white ping pong balls so lets keep them bouncing,too many viruses out there for computerized drawings thats one reason why i signed
Yinzer Country, PA
March 18, 2004
|Posted: September 30, 2004, 1:50 am - IP Logged|
i'm for using ball machines because they are entertaining as well. some states actually put pizzazz in their drawings. for example, west virginia does their drawings in front of a blue screen, and they always put a nice scenic background behind the drawing. pennsylvania has animations of balls bouncing behind the drawings. new york has the ball machines on kind of a lazy susan type of platform, and it rotates when they go from numbers to win 4. virginia's lottery personalities have a lot of enthusiasm when they draw the numbers.
I've redone my website. Go to www.dr-ew.com. I kept a lot of the old stuff, and I've added some new stuff. Look for more new stuff in the coming weeks.
October 15, 2004
|Posted: October 15, 2004, 3:12 am - IP Logged|
i definitely would not want to play a lottery in a state which uses computers...i've read the horrors stories about indiana and i would bet anything there is something amiss there especially when you have a whole state with only one winner on pick four a day that sounds way off like they are controlling the amount of money won.....
July 29, 2003
|Posted: October 26, 2004, 5:23 pm - IP Logged|
Forever glorious be your names, o wise gamers, for they prove that only Randomness is Almighty! Randomness is Great!
Allow me to jot down a few thoughts as communicated to me by the expert in Randomness himself. I swore to keep his name secret, for the lottery hit-men might hit him (but not with a jackpot!).
You are right and also wrong regarding the true randomness of computer generation. The computers can generate numbers as highly random as by manual selection. The first essential condition is the random seed. Using the computer timer results in lowly random generation. They call it pseudo-randomness. I did write far better seed generators for Visual Basic and PowerBasic. You can see the source code of one of the randomization functions plus a fully functional program here:
Basic source code to generate truly random & unique numbers
The second essential condition for highly randomized generation is the SPEED of execution. The higher the speed, the lower the degree of randomness. The software takes an 18-digit floating-point number and generates the first random number (which is floating point, between 0 and 1). The software multiplies that number between 0 and 1 by the largest number in a lotto game (as an example). The calculation is very fast. The software generates quickly another floating-point number and multiplies it again, etc. Because the calculations are extremely fast, the numbers generated tend to be close to their neighbors. I remember way back when I used an Atari to generate random numbers. The degree of randomness was far higher than what the PCs gave me. Now, delaying the random generation does improve the degree of randomness. My software is not plagued by computerized pseudo-randomization because it performs up to billions of operations. The operations delay considerably the generating of combinations. I noticed long ago that if the seed generation is inside the generating loop and there is no delay, the numbers tend to repeat or to be very close to each other. For, example generating 6 lotto numbers from 1 to 49:
FOR Counter = 1 to 6
Lottonumber(Counter) = CLNG(RND * 49) + 1
But if I added a DELAY command just before the NEXT Counter command, then the randomization improves. Also the RANDOMIZE TheSeed command should be moved outside the loop (before FOR Counter = 1 to 6).
Like it or not, the future of the lottery starts with a C: Computerized. Actually, I wish they would convert to everything-computerized-on-line-lottery much faster. It would be a lot more convenient to open an online account and play your combinations online. No need to print numbers on paper (that saves trees, too). But I understand there could be a problem still: Trust-but verify! If the governments adopt computerized drawings, they must show the drawings on TV. The drawing computers must be locked up by law enforcement agencies. Such computers must not be connected to any other computers and especially must be isolated from the Internet. I am sure theyll find the proper methods that may be verified also by citizens under regulations of freedom of information.
I know first hand that computerized generation can be seriously flawed and even fraudulent. I can say this in any court of law. The slot machines for blackjack (in land-based casinos) are programmed to beat the player, no matter what. Say nothing of the online casinos. The software the cyber casinos employ is so fraudulent that only hard-core idiots will play online (from now on)! But the lottery commissions are different. Lets put cynicism aside for a minute. The government agencies are under better control than a bunch of gambling operators who take refuge in the islands of the Caribbean. Read more:
The Philosophical Science Of Winning And The Law
Let the lottery commissions embrace the future. But let also the citizenry to exercise their right to keep the government accountable. Before anything else, make sure ALL lottery drawings, computerized including, are shown on live television.
Doctor in Occult Science of Randomness
February 2, 2004
|Posted: November 13, 2004, 2:46 pm - IP Logged|
Speaking of Indiana, the Hoosier State had 0 pic 3 evening winners again last nite. Apparently all of us players here are doing something wrong----all the time!