<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_22_027229</id>
	<title>Brazilian Breaks Secrecy of Brazil's E-Voting Machines With Van Eck Phreaking</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1258902660000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>After the report last week that Brazil's e-voting machines had <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/09/11/14/1936200/Hackers-Fail-To-Crack-Brazilian-Voting-Machines">withstood the scrutiny of a team of invited hackers</a>, reader ateu writes with news that a hacker has shown that the Linux-based voting machines aren't perfectly safe; he was <a href="http://translate.google.com.br/translate?js=y&amp;prev=\_t&amp;hl=pt-BR&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;u=http\%3A\%2F\%2Fidgnow.uol.com.br\%2Fseguranca\%2F2009\%2F11\%2F20\%2Fperito-quebra-sigilo-eleitoral-e-descobre-voto-de-eleitores-na-urna-eletronica\%2F&amp;sl=pt&amp;tl=en">able to eavesdrop on them</a> (translated from Portuguese)  by means of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van\_Eck">Van Eck phreaking</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After the report last week that Brazil 's e-voting machines had withstood the scrutiny of a team of invited hackers , reader ateu writes with news that a hacker has shown that the Linux-based voting machines are n't perfectly safe ; he was able to eavesdrop on them ( translated from Portuguese ) by means of Van Eck phreaking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After the report last week that Brazil's e-voting machines had withstood the scrutiny of a team of invited hackers, reader ateu writes with news that a hacker has shown that the Linux-based voting machines aren't perfectly safe; he was able to eavesdrop on them (translated from Portuguese)  by means of Van Eck phreaking.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640</id>
	<title>Whew, that was a close one...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258820580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Listening in" and actually breaking the security of the machine are two entirely different things. What's the most someone could do with this exploit? Basically it just allows for a more accurate exit-poll. As far as I see it, the machine's security has still yet to be bested.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Listening in " and actually breaking the security of the machine are two entirely different things .
What 's the most someone could do with this exploit ?
Basically it just allows for a more accurate exit-poll .
As far as I see it , the machine 's security has still yet to be bested .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Listening in" and actually breaking the security of the machine are two entirely different things.
What's the most someone could do with this exploit?
Basically it just allows for a more accurate exit-poll.
As far as I see it, the machine's security has still yet to be bested.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192650</id>
	<title>On a different note,</title>
	<author>sega01</author>
	<datestamp>1258898160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't Google Translator amazing? The translation was *very* readable. I don't know about accuracy since I don't know Portuguese, but the English output was incredible. I'm really impressed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't Google Translator amazing ?
The translation was * very * readable .
I do n't know about accuracy since I do n't know Portuguese , but the English output was incredible .
I 'm really impressed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't Google Translator amazing?
The translation was *very* readable.
I don't know about accuracy since I don't know Portuguese, but the English output was incredible.
I'm really impressed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190860</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>mariushm</author>
	<datestamp>1258823400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LCD screens are also sensitive... so I'd say maybe... Monochrome 640x480 LED Matrix and custom video chips.... or "Split-Flap type display" as seen here <a href="http://www.salient.com.au/products-splitflap.htm" title="salient.com.au">http://www.salient.com.au/products-splitflap.htm</a> [salient.com.au]<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... maybe some sort of adapted nixie tubes as seen here :  <a href="http://www.vintagecalculators.com/html/calculator\_displays.html#ColdCathode" title="vintagecalculators.com">http://www.vintagecalculators.com/html/calculator\_displays.html#ColdCathode</a> [vintagecalculators.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LCD screens are also sensitive... so I 'd say maybe... Monochrome 640x480 LED Matrix and custom video chips.... or " Split-Flap type display " as seen here http : //www.salient.com.au/products-splitflap.htm [ salient.com.au ] ... maybe some sort of adapted nixie tubes as seen here : http : //www.vintagecalculators.com/html/calculator \ _displays.html # ColdCathode [ vintagecalculators.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LCD screens are also sensitive... so I'd say maybe... Monochrome 640x480 LED Matrix and custom video chips.... or "Split-Flap type display" as seen here http://www.salient.com.au/products-splitflap.htm [salient.com.au] ... maybe some sort of adapted nixie tubes as seen here :  http://www.vintagecalculators.com/html/calculator\_displays.html#ColdCathode [vintagecalculators.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191586</id>
	<title>Re:I'm still not even at this step yet</title>
	<author>Onymous Coward</author>
	<datestamp>1258833300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Among the others, enabling a non-FPTP system.</p><p>If anyone isn't aware of how FPTP has hosed democracy, they should start <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First\_past\_the\_post#Disadvantages" title="wikipedia.org">here</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>The primary concern I recognize is that FPTP collapses your system into a two-party system and makes third parties non-viable.  Just try voting for Nader or Kucinich.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Among the others , enabling a non-FPTP system.If anyone is n't aware of how FPTP has hosed democracy , they should start here [ wikipedia.org ] .The primary concern I recognize is that FPTP collapses your system into a two-party system and makes third parties non-viable .
Just try voting for Nader or Kucinich .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Among the others, enabling a non-FPTP system.If anyone isn't aware of how FPTP has hosed democracy, they should start here [wikipedia.org].The primary concern I recognize is that FPTP collapses your system into a two-party system and makes third parties non-viable.
Just try voting for Nader or Kucinich.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190700</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193666</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb question...</title>
	<author>devendra\_l</author>
	<datestamp>1258907700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You actually don't need a screen on any type.
You need a button and a LED next to it. And a paper sticker next to the button to indicate the party/candidate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You actually do n't need a screen on any type .
You need a button and a LED next to it .
And a paper sticker next to the button to indicate the party/candidate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You actually don't need a screen on any type.
You need a button and a LED next to it.
And a paper sticker next to the button to indicate the party/candidate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190792</id>
	<title>Re:Whew, that was a close one...</title>
	<author>Animaether</author>
	<datestamp>1258822740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What's the most someone could do with this exploit? Basically it just allows for a more accurate exit-poll.</p></div></blockquote><p>Basically.. all of the reasons you want voting to be done anonymously apply here.</p><p>If you can couple the emissions at the location of the machine with the emissions from a particular user - say, their mobile phone's signature - then you can go back to forcing people to vote for X and make sure that they do, roughing them up as an example to the others you told to vote for X if you detected a vote for Y instead, without a need to plant something on them or leaving any trace.</p><p>In theory, anyway.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the most someone could do with this exploit ?
Basically it just allows for a more accurate exit-poll.Basically.. all of the reasons you want voting to be done anonymously apply here.If you can couple the emissions at the location of the machine with the emissions from a particular user - say , their mobile phone 's signature - then you can go back to forcing people to vote for X and make sure that they do , roughing them up as an example to the others you told to vote for X if you detected a vote for Y instead , without a need to plant something on them or leaving any trace.In theory , anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the most someone could do with this exploit?
Basically it just allows for a more accurate exit-poll.Basically.. all of the reasons you want voting to be done anonymously apply here.If you can couple the emissions at the location of the machine with the emissions from a particular user - say, their mobile phone's signature - then you can go back to forcing people to vote for X and make sure that they do, roughing them up as an example to the others you told to vote for X if you detected a vote for Y instead, without a need to plant something on them or leaving any trace.In theory, anyway.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190816</id>
	<title>Re:Whew, that was a close one...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258822860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>exactly, this is hardly news and besides shouldn't they point out that ALL e-voting machines are subject to this very same exploit? (unless they have proven they cannot be of course!)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>exactly , this is hardly news and besides should n't they point out that ALL e-voting machines are subject to this very same exploit ?
( unless they have proven they can not be of course !
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>exactly, this is hardly news and besides shouldn't they point out that ALL e-voting machines are subject to this very same exploit?
(unless they have proven they cannot be of course!
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192164</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258887840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections\_in\_Brazil" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">There are two pictures in wikipedia.</a> [wikipedia.org] I've been voting on these since I was 16, there's no touchscreen, just a grayscale LCD and a numeric keypad with braille marks and aditional keys to confirm, cancel or choose NOTA (none of the above), aka "votar em branco"  (in Brazil voting is mandatory).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are two pictures in wikipedia .
[ wikipedia.org ] I 've been voting on these since I was 16 , there 's no touchscreen , just a grayscale LCD and a numeric keypad with braille marks and aditional keys to confirm , cancel or choose NOTA ( none of the above ) , aka " votar em branco " ( in Brazil voting is mandatory ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are two pictures in wikipedia.
[wikipedia.org] I've been voting on these since I was 16, there's no touchscreen, just a grayscale LCD and a numeric keypad with braille marks and aditional keys to confirm, cancel or choose NOTA (none of the above), aka "votar em branco"  (in Brazil voting is mandatory).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193278</id>
	<title>Re:Whew, that was a close one...</title>
	<author>johno.ie</author>
	<datestamp>1258904880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, good old fashioned paper ballots can be eavesdropped by using hidden wireless cameras.<br>I doubt there is any voting system that can't be compromised in some way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , good old fashioned paper ballots can be eavesdropped by using hidden wireless cameras.I doubt there is any voting system that ca n't be compromised in some way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, good old fashioned paper ballots can be eavesdropped by using hidden wireless cameras.I doubt there is any voting system that can't be compromised in some way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190832</id>
	<title>Re:Whew, that was a close one...</title>
	<author>coppro</author>
	<datestamp>1258823040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The issue is one of anonymity. Someone could (comparatively) easily phreak a machine when a specific person walks into the polling booth so that they could determine that person's vote. The integrity of the results is not compromised, however; there is no threat of vote-stuffing or fraud.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The issue is one of anonymity .
Someone could ( comparatively ) easily phreak a machine when a specific person walks into the polling booth so that they could determine that person 's vote .
The integrity of the results is not compromised , however ; there is no threat of vote-stuffing or fraud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The issue is one of anonymity.
Someone could (comparatively) easily phreak a machine when a specific person walks into the polling booth so that they could determine that person's vote.
The integrity of the results is not compromised, however; there is no threat of vote-stuffing or fraud.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191150</id>
	<title>Re:I'm still not even at this step yet</title>
	<author>Volante3192</author>
	<datestamp>1258827540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Easier for the disabled.  Easier to support multiple languages.  Easier to have duplicate copies so you can't be surprised and "find" a box of ballots in a warehouse later.  Less ambiguity in regards to intention (see Minnesota's Senate race.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Easier for the disabled .
Easier to support multiple languages .
Easier to have duplicate copies so you ca n't be surprised and " find " a box of ballots in a warehouse later .
Less ambiguity in regards to intention ( see Minnesota 's Senate race .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Easier for the disabled.
Easier to support multiple languages.
Easier to have duplicate copies so you can't be surprised and "find" a box of ballots in a warehouse later.
Less ambiguity in regards to intention (see Minnesota's Senate race.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190700</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191454</id>
	<title>As a person in the infosec field</title>
	<author>seifried</author>
	<datestamp>1258831500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is why I love the Canadian method: paper with circles, make an "X" in the circle you want, fold the paper and put it in the ballot box. Good luck hacking that on a large scale (what with scrutineers from multiple parties watching the election and the count and each other, plus the people there as independent scrutineers watching everyone else), and monitoring it (little cardboard voting booth on a table, voila, privacy. The only argument I could imagine is finger prints on the ballots, but you can wear gloves if you want.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why I love the Canadian method : paper with circles , make an " X " in the circle you want , fold the paper and put it in the ballot box .
Good luck hacking that on a large scale ( what with scrutineers from multiple parties watching the election and the count and each other , plus the people there as independent scrutineers watching everyone else ) , and monitoring it ( little cardboard voting booth on a table , voila , privacy .
The only argument I could imagine is finger prints on the ballots , but you can wear gloves if you want .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why I love the Canadian method: paper with circles, make an "X" in the circle you want, fold the paper and put it in the ballot box.
Good luck hacking that on a large scale (what with scrutineers from multiple parties watching the election and the count and each other, plus the people there as independent scrutineers watching everyone else), and monitoring it (little cardboard voting booth on a table, voila, privacy.
The only argument I could imagine is finger prints on the ballots, but you can wear gloves if you want.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192612</id>
	<title>Jealousy all around</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258897620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, it is pretty clear most of comments around Brazil's e-Voting machines are pure jealousy. Believe or not, they DO work and they ARE safe. People complaining about eavesdropping, hacking and manipulation have really no idea about how easy is to replace a bag full of voting papers with another exactly equal bag full of already manipulated voting papers. Yeah, then if you do believe replacing a voting bag is hard, why should replacing a results file, the voting application or the entire machine is that easy?</p><p>Truth is, there is NO single bullet-proof, 100\% safe system. Anyone can be manipulated, just like machines. And the humans are way more ea$y manipulated than the machines.</p><p>To shorten things, e-Voting machines are here obeying computer rule #1: Ease human tasks. Why to hire 1000 people and have them spending 30 hours/each counting votes, if you can update a database and have results done (sometimes) in less than 2 hours?</p><p>Again, what Brazil is proving is, computers can be trusted. People, however, will never be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , it is pretty clear most of comments around Brazil 's e-Voting machines are pure jealousy .
Believe or not , they DO work and they ARE safe .
People complaining about eavesdropping , hacking and manipulation have really no idea about how easy is to replace a bag full of voting papers with another exactly equal bag full of already manipulated voting papers .
Yeah , then if you do believe replacing a voting bag is hard , why should replacing a results file , the voting application or the entire machine is that easy ? Truth is , there is NO single bullet-proof , 100 \ % safe system .
Anyone can be manipulated , just like machines .
And the humans are way more ea $ y manipulated than the machines.To shorten things , e-Voting machines are here obeying computer rule # 1 : Ease human tasks .
Why to hire 1000 people and have them spending 30 hours/each counting votes , if you can update a database and have results done ( sometimes ) in less than 2 hours ? Again , what Brazil is proving is , computers can be trusted .
People , however , will never be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, it is pretty clear most of comments around Brazil's e-Voting machines are pure jealousy.
Believe or not, they DO work and they ARE safe.
People complaining about eavesdropping, hacking and manipulation have really no idea about how easy is to replace a bag full of voting papers with another exactly equal bag full of already manipulated voting papers.
Yeah, then if you do believe replacing a voting bag is hard, why should replacing a results file, the voting application or the entire machine is that easy?Truth is, there is NO single bullet-proof, 100\% safe system.
Anyone can be manipulated, just like machines.
And the humans are way more ea$y manipulated than the machines.To shorten things, e-Voting machines are here obeying computer rule #1: Ease human tasks.
Why to hire 1000 people and have them spending 30 hours/each counting votes, if you can update a database and have results done (sometimes) in less than 2 hours?Again, what Brazil is proving is, computers can be trusted.
People, however, will never be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191164</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258827720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Low-contrast fonts are probably right out, since you don't want to disenfranchise old folks and others with vision problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Low-contrast fonts are probably right out , since you do n't want to disenfranchise old folks and others with vision problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Low-contrast fonts are probably right out, since you don't want to disenfranchise old folks and others with vision problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191794</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>Toonol</author>
	<datestamp>1258922820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right.  Of <i>course</i> these machines are vulnerable to Van Eck phreaking.  Pretty much everything with a CRT and a lot of LCDs are vulnerable.  That's barely more of a true security flaw than the fact that the machines are vulnerable to hiding a camera in the poling booth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right .
Of course these machines are vulnerable to Van Eck phreaking .
Pretty much everything with a CRT and a lot of LCDs are vulnerable .
That 's barely more of a true security flaw than the fact that the machines are vulnerable to hiding a camera in the poling booth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right.
Of course these machines are vulnerable to Van Eck phreaking.
Pretty much everything with a CRT and a lot of LCDs are vulnerable.
That's barely more of a true security flaw than the fact that the machines are vulnerable to hiding a camera in the poling booth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190756</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>jambarama</author>
	<datestamp>1258822140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not only that, but no device will ever be "perfectly safe."  That phrase doesn't appear in TFA, it shouldn't have been put in the summary.  If someone has to resort to Van Eck phreaking just to eavesdrop on polling because an open hacking competition yielded no vulnerabilities, it sounds  pretty darn safe.  Publicizing the vulnerability is still a good thing, maybe someone will be able to come up with a reasonable defense, but it doesn't sound like a showstopper to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only that , but no device will ever be " perfectly safe .
" That phrase does n't appear in TFA , it should n't have been put in the summary .
If someone has to resort to Van Eck phreaking just to eavesdrop on polling because an open hacking competition yielded no vulnerabilities , it sounds pretty darn safe .
Publicizing the vulnerability is still a good thing , maybe someone will be able to come up with a reasonable defense , but it does n't sound like a showstopper to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only that, but no device will ever be "perfectly safe.
"  That phrase doesn't appear in TFA, it shouldn't have been put in the summary.
If someone has to resort to Van Eck phreaking just to eavesdrop on polling because an open hacking competition yielded no vulnerabilities, it sounds  pretty darn safe.
Publicizing the vulnerability is still a good thing, maybe someone will be able to come up with a reasonable defense, but it doesn't sound like a showstopper to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193066</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>CharlieG</author>
	<datestamp>1258902960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course, there is the whole "If someone is going to that point, is it really worth the worry, or do we have more imprtant things to worry about?" (like someone sticking a hidden camera watching the screen)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , there is the whole " If someone is going to that point , is it really worth the worry , or do we have more imprtant things to worry about ?
" ( like someone sticking a hidden camera watching the screen )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, there is the whole "If someone is going to that point, is it really worth the worry, or do we have more imprtant things to worry about?
" (like someone sticking a hidden camera watching the screen)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193674</id>
	<title>Canadian vs. US votying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258907760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is why I love the Canadian method: paper with circles, make an "X" in the circle you want, fold the paper and put it in the ballot box.</p> </div><p>I'm in Canada, and am fairly happy with the way things work here, but this method may not work everywhere. Specifically for the US, they tend for almost <em>everything</em>.</p><p>First off, when we have an election / voting day, it's generally for one thing only: either municipal, or provincial (like state), or federal. We also have a lot more appointed "bureaucratic" positions: judges and sheriffs are not elected, nor are Crown prosecutors (DAs).</p><p>In the US, when you go into an voting booth it's usually on "Election Day", and where you vote for: city, county, state, federal, judges (all of them), sheriff, district attorney, chief dog catcher, etc. At the end of the night you have to count <em>all</em> off those different ballots, whereas in Canada you only have to count the ballot for one election.</p><p>There are times when two elections (e.g., city and province) are run at the same time, but it's rare. At most if there's a major political debate there may also be a referendum (like a US proposition), but those are fairly rare (maybe one a decade or so). Usually they involve a Constitutional amendment, or more recently in Ontario and BC (2007, 2005), a change to the way voting is done (from first-past-the-post to proportional representation).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why I love the Canadian method : paper with circles , make an " X " in the circle you want , fold the paper and put it in the ballot box .
I 'm in Canada , and am fairly happy with the way things work here , but this method may not work everywhere .
Specifically for the US , they tend for almost everything.First off , when we have an election / voting day , it 's generally for one thing only : either municipal , or provincial ( like state ) , or federal .
We also have a lot more appointed " bureaucratic " positions : judges and sheriffs are not elected , nor are Crown prosecutors ( DAs ) .In the US , when you go into an voting booth it 's usually on " Election Day " , and where you vote for : city , county , state , federal , judges ( all of them ) , sheriff , district attorney , chief dog catcher , etc .
At the end of the night you have to count all off those different ballots , whereas in Canada you only have to count the ballot for one election.There are times when two elections ( e.g. , city and province ) are run at the same time , but it 's rare .
At most if there 's a major political debate there may also be a referendum ( like a US proposition ) , but those are fairly rare ( maybe one a decade or so ) .
Usually they involve a Constitutional amendment , or more recently in Ontario and BC ( 2007 , 2005 ) , a change to the way voting is done ( from first-past-the-post to proportional representation ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why I love the Canadian method: paper with circles, make an "X" in the circle you want, fold the paper and put it in the ballot box.
I'm in Canada, and am fairly happy with the way things work here, but this method may not work everywhere.
Specifically for the US, they tend for almost everything.First off, when we have an election / voting day, it's generally for one thing only: either municipal, or provincial (like state), or federal.
We also have a lot more appointed "bureaucratic" positions: judges and sheriffs are not elected, nor are Crown prosecutors (DAs).In the US, when you go into an voting booth it's usually on "Election Day", and where you vote for: city, county, state, federal, judges (all of them), sheriff, district attorney, chief dog catcher, etc.
At the end of the night you have to count all off those different ballots, whereas in Canada you only have to count the ballot for one election.There are times when two elections (e.g., city and province) are run at the same time, but it's rare.
At most if there's a major political debate there may also be a referendum (like a US proposition), but those are fairly rare (maybe one a decade or so).
Usually they involve a Constitutional amendment, or more recently in Ontario and BC (2007, 2005), a change to the way voting is done (from first-past-the-post to proportional representation).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30194200</id>
	<title>Dumber question...</title>
	<author>Civil\_Disobedient</author>
	<datestamp>1258911600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Why does the electronic voting machine have to be</i></p><p>Why does the voting machine even have to be electronic?</p><p>Even <i>one</i> good reason would be nice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does the electronic voting machine have to beWhy does the voting machine even have to be electronic ? Even one good reason would be nice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does the electronic voting machine have to beWhy does the voting machine even have to be electronic?Even one good reason would be nice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191094</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258826820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Encryption.  Same thing as your web browser.  Treat the monitor and the PC like Alice and Bob.  From the linked Wikipedia source in the article summary [#4]</p><p><div class="quote"><p>In both cases, the video cable used to connect the display panel with the<br>graphics controller turned out to be the primary source of the leaking signal.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Encryption .
Same thing as your web browser .
Treat the monitor and the PC like Alice and Bob .
From the linked Wikipedia source in the article summary [ # 4 ] In both cases , the video cable used to connect the display panel with thegraphics controller turned out to be the primary source of the leaking signal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Encryption.
Same thing as your web browser.
Treat the monitor and the PC like Alice and Bob.
From the linked Wikipedia source in the article summary [#4]In both cases, the video cable used to connect the display panel with thegraphics controller turned out to be the primary source of the leaking signal.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192438</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>mspohr</author>
	<datestamp>1258893480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You could also view votes with a video camera in the ceiling and it would also give you a picture of the top of the person's head to help with identification.  This would also work to reveal paper ballots as well as electronic machines.  Think of the children! You could also ask people how they voted when they left the polling place and most people would just tell you!  Some would lie but only because you were ugly.  In other news, most people don't vote; those who do vote are uninformed; and the only votes that really count is the money that comes from corporations.  I know it's Sunday but it's raining here and I don't have anything better to do than read this drivel.<p>

(Note to moderators... I'm going for funny here but feel free to mark as 'stupid'.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You could also view votes with a video camera in the ceiling and it would also give you a picture of the top of the person 's head to help with identification .
This would also work to reveal paper ballots as well as electronic machines .
Think of the children !
You could also ask people how they voted when they left the polling place and most people would just tell you !
Some would lie but only because you were ugly .
In other news , most people do n't vote ; those who do vote are uninformed ; and the only votes that really count is the money that comes from corporations .
I know it 's Sunday but it 's raining here and I do n't have anything better to do than read this drivel .
( Note to moderators... I 'm going for funny here but feel free to mark as 'stupid' .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could also view votes with a video camera in the ceiling and it would also give you a picture of the top of the person's head to help with identification.
This would also work to reveal paper ballots as well as electronic machines.
Think of the children!
You could also ask people how they voted when they left the polling place and most people would just tell you!
Some would lie but only because you were ugly.
In other news, most people don't vote; those who do vote are uninformed; and the only votes that really count is the money that comes from corporations.
I know it's Sunday but it's raining here and I don't have anything better to do than read this drivel.
(Note to moderators... I'm going for funny here but feel free to mark as 'stupid'.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190820</id>
	<title>Cryptonomicon</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1258822920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What options do you have to protect your self from Van eck phreaking? Lead casing? Foil voting boxes?</p><p>Honest replies welcome.</p></div><p>Put rubbish on the screen and send all your actual output through the caps lock LED with xled.</p><p>Not very useful outside in the real world, I know.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What options do you have to protect your self from Van eck phreaking ?
Lead casing ?
Foil voting boxes ? Honest replies welcome.Put rubbish on the screen and send all your actual output through the caps lock LED with xled.Not very useful outside in the real world , I know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What options do you have to protect your self from Van eck phreaking?
Lead casing?
Foil voting boxes?Honest replies welcome.Put rubbish on the screen and send all your actual output through the caps lock LED with xled.Not very useful outside in the real world, I know.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30198842</id>
	<title>Re:As a person in the infosec field</title>
	<author>bruno.fatia</author>
	<datestamp>1258905840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You should consider that Brazil has almost 6 times the canadian population (180 million for Brazil and 30 for Canada) and that these voting machines have decreased the time it takes to display results greatly. We have results with 90\%+ machines accounted in less than 12 hours. So far this hack has been the most significant issue and it can be prevented now that the information is public.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You should consider that Brazil has almost 6 times the canadian population ( 180 million for Brazil and 30 for Canada ) and that these voting machines have decreased the time it takes to display results greatly .
We have results with 90 \ % + machines accounted in less than 12 hours .
So far this hack has been the most significant issue and it can be prevented now that the information is public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should consider that Brazil has almost 6 times the canadian population (180 million for Brazil and 30 for Canada) and that these voting machines have decreased the time it takes to display results greatly.
We have results with 90\%+ machines accounted in less than 12 hours.
So far this hack has been the most significant issue and it can be prevented now that the information is public.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193454</id>
	<title>Paper Ballots fail for ONE reason</title>
	<author>myspace-cn</author>
	<datestamp>1258906080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First off I want to say, fuck Brazil's elections, it's not the United States!</p><p>Paper Ballots fail for one reason, a broken chain of custody.</p><p>A chain of custody, doesn't mean officials can seal off a building saying there's a terrorist threat.<br>A chain of custody, must be made up of the public. e.g. Humans.  Not Cops, Corrupt Officials, or Invisible Electronic Signals.<br>A chain of custody, must be maintained 24/7, until all the votes are counted, and the total is final.<br>A chain of custody, can not be maintained when officials abuse their authority and the public backs down.<br>A chain of custody, can not be maintained, when untrained (in electronics, physics, and programming) local law enforcement arrest poll watchers</p><p>All electronic vote tabulation devices are, by definition a broken chain of custody. (humans can not see electronic signals)<br>Electronic registered voter poll books have the same problems electronic vote tabulation devices have</p><p>This is why an electronic solution is impossible.</p><p>You want honest elections?</p><p>Turn the Fucking Power off.<br>Use paper ballots, with an unbroken public chain of custody.<br>
&nbsp; (Not this half ass kiddy shit where officials dictate the whole process, using local law enforcement, to bar access!)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First off I want to say , fuck Brazil 's elections , it 's not the United States ! Paper Ballots fail for one reason , a broken chain of custody.A chain of custody , does n't mean officials can seal off a building saying there 's a terrorist threat.A chain of custody , must be made up of the public .
e.g. Humans .
Not Cops , Corrupt Officials , or Invisible Electronic Signals.A chain of custody , must be maintained 24/7 , until all the votes are counted , and the total is final.A chain of custody , can not be maintained when officials abuse their authority and the public backs down.A chain of custody , can not be maintained , when untrained ( in electronics , physics , and programming ) local law enforcement arrest poll watchersAll electronic vote tabulation devices are , by definition a broken chain of custody .
( humans can not see electronic signals ) Electronic registered voter poll books have the same problems electronic vote tabulation devices haveThis is why an electronic solution is impossible.You want honest elections ? Turn the Fucking Power off.Use paper ballots , with an unbroken public chain of custody .
  ( Not this half ass kiddy shit where officials dictate the whole process , using local law enforcement , to bar access !
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First off I want to say, fuck Brazil's elections, it's not the United States!Paper Ballots fail for one reason, a broken chain of custody.A chain of custody, doesn't mean officials can seal off a building saying there's a terrorist threat.A chain of custody, must be made up of the public.
e.g. Humans.
Not Cops, Corrupt Officials, or Invisible Electronic Signals.A chain of custody, must be maintained 24/7, until all the votes are counted, and the total is final.A chain of custody, can not be maintained when officials abuse their authority and the public backs down.A chain of custody, can not be maintained, when untrained (in electronics, physics, and programming) local law enforcement arrest poll watchersAll electronic vote tabulation devices are, by definition a broken chain of custody.
(humans can not see electronic signals)Electronic registered voter poll books have the same problems electronic vote tabulation devices haveThis is why an electronic solution is impossible.You want honest elections?Turn the Fucking Power off.Use paper ballots, with an unbroken public chain of custody.
  (Not this half ass kiddy shit where officials dictate the whole process, using local law enforcement, to bar access!
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190656</id>
	<title>Physical Security</title>
	<author>tetsukaze</author>
	<datestamp>1258820700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>So the cheap devices he used only worked inches away. A more powerful device might work up to 20 meters away. Now, I assume a more powerful antennae is going to mean a bigger one. Isn't this going to stand out? I would hope that there is someone in charge that would notice a foot long antennae being pointed at voting areas.
You can secure the machine itself, but if you don't have real people doing their part, it doesn't matter how secure your voting machine is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So the cheap devices he used only worked inches away .
A more powerful device might work up to 20 meters away .
Now , I assume a more powerful antennae is going to mean a bigger one .
Is n't this going to stand out ?
I would hope that there is someone in charge that would notice a foot long antennae being pointed at voting areas .
You can secure the machine itself , but if you do n't have real people doing their part , it does n't matter how secure your voting machine is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the cheap devices he used only worked inches away.
A more powerful device might work up to 20 meters away.
Now, I assume a more powerful antennae is going to mean a bigger one.
Isn't this going to stand out?
I would hope that there is someone in charge that would notice a foot long antennae being pointed at voting areas.
You can secure the machine itself, but if you don't have real people doing their part, it doesn't matter how secure your voting machine is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193790</id>
	<title>Re:No technology will prevent that</title>
	<author>hrimhari</author>
	<datestamp>1258908840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And you can do that regardless of votes being cast on paper or with a machine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And you can do that regardless of votes being cast on paper or with a machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And you can do that regardless of votes being cast on paper or with a machine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190978</id>
	<title>Re:Whew, that was a close one...</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1258825380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Use it as feedback to calibrate a separate vote rigging operation. If your guy wins by 20\% an investigation may be triggered. If he wins by 2\% you may be in the clear. So how do you gauge the real vote, while there is still time to cast face votes?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use it as feedback to calibrate a separate vote rigging operation .
If your guy wins by 20 \ % an investigation may be triggered .
If he wins by 2 \ % you may be in the clear .
So how do you gauge the real vote , while there is still time to cast face votes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use it as feedback to calibrate a separate vote rigging operation.
If your guy wins by 20\% an investigation may be triggered.
If he wins by 2\% you may be in the clear.
So how do you gauge the real vote, while there is still time to cast face votes?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192080</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258886340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about using a method of voting that is fraud proof, costs almost nothing, and gives instant results at the end of the voting without any need for manual counting?</p><p>The Robinson Voting Method.</p><p>http://paul-robinson.us/index.php?blog=5&amp;title=the\_robinson\_method\_a\_really\_simple\_way\_&amp;more=1&amp;c=1&amp;tb=1&amp;pb=1</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about using a method of voting that is fraud proof , costs almost nothing , and gives instant results at the end of the voting without any need for manual counting ? The Robinson Voting Method.http : //paul-robinson.us/index.php ? blog = 5&amp;title = the \ _robinson \ _method \ _a \ _really \ _simple \ _way \ _&amp;more = 1&amp;c = 1&amp;tb = 1&amp;pb = 1</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about using a method of voting that is fraud proof, costs almost nothing, and gives instant results at the end of the voting without any need for manual counting?The Robinson Voting Method.http://paul-robinson.us/index.php?blog=5&amp;title=the\_robinson\_method\_a\_really\_simple\_way\_&amp;more=1&amp;c=1&amp;tb=1&amp;pb=1</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193880</id>
	<title>Re:E-paper</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258909440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep.  My idea as soon as I saw this article.  You beat me to it.</p><p>Anyone got a technical reason why this wouldn't work?  Has anyone looked at Van Eck phreaking on e-Ink?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep .
My idea as soon as I saw this article .
You beat me to it.Anyone got a technical reason why this would n't work ?
Has anyone looked at Van Eck phreaking on e-Ink ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep.
My idea as soon as I saw this article.
You beat me to it.Anyone got a technical reason why this wouldn't work?
Has anyone looked at Van Eck phreaking on e-Ink?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190950</id>
	<title>Radiation limitation through verse</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258825080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At last, an excuse to use "election day" and "Faraday" in a rhyming couplet!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At last , an excuse to use " election day " and " Faraday " in a rhyming couplet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At last, an excuse to use "election day" and "Faraday" in a rhyming couplet!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190804</id>
	<title>Re:Whew, that was a close one...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258822860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i><br>What's the most someone could do with this exploit?<br></i><br>Uhh..  find out who someone voted for?  All you need is two people, one in the polling place and someone else with one of these devices.  If I really have to try to convince you of the value of secret votes, I give up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the most someone could do with this exploit ? Uhh.. find out who someone voted for ?
All you need is two people , one in the polling place and someone else with one of these devices .
If I really have to try to convince you of the value of secret votes , I give up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the most someone could do with this exploit?Uhh..  find out who someone voted for?
All you need is two people, one in the polling place and someone else with one of these devices.
If I really have to try to convince you of the value of secret votes, I give up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30202930</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1258996740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure if your post was sarcasm and it whooshed over the head of the rest of Slashdot or if you're serious.</p><p>The KGB (now FSB) took Russia, the Republicans took the US, Ahmadinejad took Iran, Karzai has taken Afghanistan and so on all without winning the elections through fair process.</p><p>Unfortunately election fraud by organised groups happens far too often, even in nations where it really shouldn't because they're supposed to be role models (i.e. the US). I'm hoping then that your post was rather subtle sarcasm!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure if your post was sarcasm and it whooshed over the head of the rest of Slashdot or if you 're serious.The KGB ( now FSB ) took Russia , the Republicans took the US , Ahmadinejad took Iran , Karzai has taken Afghanistan and so on all without winning the elections through fair process.Unfortunately election fraud by organised groups happens far too often , even in nations where it really should n't because they 're supposed to be role models ( i.e .
the US ) .
I 'm hoping then that your post was rather subtle sarcasm !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure if your post was sarcasm and it whooshed over the head of the rest of Slashdot or if you're serious.The KGB (now FSB) took Russia, the Republicans took the US, Ahmadinejad took Iran, Karzai has taken Afghanistan and so on all without winning the elections through fair process.Unfortunately election fraud by organised groups happens far too often, even in nations where it really shouldn't because they're supposed to be role models (i.e.
the US).
I'm hoping then that your post was rather subtle sarcasm!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190764</id>
	<title>This happened with the Dutch in 2006</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258822260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>As discussed here in 2006, the Dutch had to modify their voting machines back in 2006 due to exactly this sort of attack. <a href="http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/14/1641239" title="slashdot.org">http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/14/1641239</a> [slashdot.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>As discussed here in 2006 , the Dutch had to modify their voting machines back in 2006 due to exactly this sort of attack .
http : //politics.slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 06/10/14/1641239 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As discussed here in 2006, the Dutch had to modify their voting machines back in 2006 due to exactly this sort of attack.
http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/14/1641239 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192380</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>nstlgc</author>
	<datestamp>1258892580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean Republicans?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean Republicans ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean Republicans?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30200916</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1258984500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>someone else linked <a href="http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/pet2004-fpd.pdf" title="cam.ac.uk">http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/pet2004-fpd.pdf</a> [cam.ac.uk] which gives some countermeasures.</p><p>In summary firsly use a LCD screen, this pretty much eliminates emmisions from the display itself but the link to the display is still be an issue. Countermeasures against link snooping can include messing with foreground and background colours, adding noise or best of all using an encrypted (e.g. HDCP) digital link.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>someone else linked http : //www.cl.cam.ac.uk/ ~ mgk25/pet2004-fpd.pdf [ cam.ac.uk ] which gives some countermeasures.In summary firsly use a LCD screen , this pretty much eliminates emmisions from the display itself but the link to the display is still be an issue .
Countermeasures against link snooping can include messing with foreground and background colours , adding noise or best of all using an encrypted ( e.g .
HDCP ) digital link .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>someone else linked http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/pet2004-fpd.pdf [cam.ac.uk] which gives some countermeasures.In summary firsly use a LCD screen, this pretty much eliminates emmisions from the display itself but the link to the display is still be an issue.
Countermeasures against link snooping can include messing with foreground and background colours, adding noise or best of all using an encrypted (e.g.
HDCP) digital link.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190730</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>mrmeval</author>
	<datestamp>1258821840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not much really. While it is possible to effectively protect a device from such snooping it is very expensive due to the testing and handling requirements. I don't see it on the link but I think there is a commercial Tempest standard.</p><p><a href="http://www.eskimo.com/~joelm/tempestintro.html" title="eskimo.com">http://www.eskimo.com/~joelm/tempestintro.html</a> [eskimo.com]</p><p>The page has good info and you can try the anti-Tempest fonts for a grin. It's based on the paper also referenced on that page.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not much really .
While it is possible to effectively protect a device from such snooping it is very expensive due to the testing and handling requirements .
I do n't see it on the link but I think there is a commercial Tempest standard.http : //www.eskimo.com/ ~ joelm/tempestintro.html [ eskimo.com ] The page has good info and you can try the anti-Tempest fonts for a grin .
It 's based on the paper also referenced on that page .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not much really.
While it is possible to effectively protect a device from such snooping it is very expensive due to the testing and handling requirements.
I don't see it on the link but I think there is a commercial Tempest standard.http://www.eskimo.com/~joelm/tempestintro.html [eskimo.com]The page has good info and you can try the anti-Tempest fonts for a grin.
It's based on the paper also referenced on that page.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191700</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>StarsAreAlsoFire</author>
	<datestamp>1258921140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>a: Visit your local feed store.<br><br>b: Buy 100 meters of chicken wire.<br><br>c: Wrap voting booths.<br><br>I am of course being somewhat sarcastic. But not much. If you ground a wire cage as described you'd be fine. The question I'm hazy about is what frequencies are being scanned. You may need something with a finer mesh than chicken wire. Now that I actually consider it, this might also just reduce the range of the scan, rather than eliminate the possibility. Any EE's care to enlighten?</htmltext>
<tokenext>a : Visit your local feed store.b : Buy 100 meters of chicken wire.c : Wrap voting booths.I am of course being somewhat sarcastic .
But not much .
If you ground a wire cage as described you 'd be fine .
The question I 'm hazy about is what frequencies are being scanned .
You may need something with a finer mesh than chicken wire .
Now that I actually consider it , this might also just reduce the range of the scan , rather than eliminate the possibility .
Any EE 's care to enlighten ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a: Visit your local feed store.b: Buy 100 meters of chicken wire.c: Wrap voting booths.I am of course being somewhat sarcastic.
But not much.
If you ground a wire cage as described you'd be fine.
The question I'm hazy about is what frequencies are being scanned.
You may need something with a finer mesh than chicken wire.
Now that I actually consider it, this might also just reduce the range of the scan, rather than eliminate the possibility.
Any EE's care to enlighten?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190706</id>
	<title>E-paper</title>
	<author>MDMurphy</author>
	<datestamp>1258821360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Besides all the shielding options, perhaps this is a good use for E-paper displays?  The persistent nature of the display would minimize the constant refreshing.  The slow screen response would be unlikely to be an issue with a ballot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides all the shielding options , perhaps this is a good use for E-paper displays ?
The persistent nature of the display would minimize the constant refreshing .
The slow screen response would be unlikely to be an issue with a ballot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides all the shielding options, perhaps this is a good use for E-paper displays?
The persistent nature of the display would minimize the constant refreshing.
The slow screen response would be unlikely to be an issue with a ballot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30197178</id>
	<title>Re:As a person in the infosec field</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258890840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry to piss on your cereal, but paper ballots can be pretty uniquely identified:</p><p>http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/felten/fingerprinting-blank-paper-using-commodity-scanners</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry to piss on your cereal , but paper ballots can be pretty uniquely identified : http : //www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/felten/fingerprinting-blank-paper-using-commodity-scanners</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry to piss on your cereal, but paper ballots can be pretty uniquely identified:http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/felten/fingerprinting-blank-paper-using-commodity-scanners</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191748</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb question...</title>
	<author>dlgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1258921860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>North Carolina used to use a system like that, a long time ago. (I remember my parents taking me with them when they voted, I got to help my mom submit her ballot, it must have been back in '96). However, the main draw of e-voting is accessibility: the ability to have high contrast and/or large size fonts, computer reading the ballot out loud, etc. This isn't possible with the equipment you describe.</htmltext>
<tokenext>North Carolina used to use a system like that , a long time ago .
( I remember my parents taking me with them when they voted , I got to help my mom submit her ballot , it must have been back in '96 ) .
However , the main draw of e-voting is accessibility : the ability to have high contrast and/or large size fonts , computer reading the ballot out loud , etc .
This is n't possible with the equipment you describe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>North Carolina used to use a system like that, a long time ago.
(I remember my parents taking me with them when they voted, I got to help my mom submit her ballot, it must have been back in '96).
However, the main draw of e-voting is accessibility: the ability to have high contrast and/or large size fonts, computer reading the ballot out loud, etc.
This isn't possible with the equipment you describe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190690</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1258821120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Easy. Take the machine, hollow them out, put a board in and use their shell as a guard from prying eyes for pen&amp;paper voting. The manufacturers of the machines get the money and we get secure and anonymous voting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Easy .
Take the machine , hollow them out , put a board in and use their shell as a guard from prying eyes for pen&amp;paper voting .
The manufacturers of the machines get the money and we get secure and anonymous voting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Easy.
Take the machine, hollow them out, put a board in and use their shell as a guard from prying eyes for pen&amp;paper voting.
The manufacturers of the machines get the money and we get secure and anonymous voting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190622</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1258820340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Copper mesh or metal plating on the case tied to the ground. Chokes on all connections. If touchscreen, you could be screwed since it might not like a copper mesh but if it isn't covered it becomes an emitter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Copper mesh or metal plating on the case tied to the ground .
Chokes on all connections .
If touchscreen , you could be screwed since it might not like a copper mesh but if it is n't covered it becomes an emitter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Copper mesh or metal plating on the case tied to the ground.
Chokes on all connections.
If touchscreen, you could be screwed since it might not like a copper mesh but if it isn't covered it becomes an emitter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191184</id>
	<title>No technology will prevent that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258827960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not to say that secrecy isn't important, but once it requires a certain level of technology to eavesdrop then surely you just pick some random people and rough them up anyway telling the people you are intimidating that you have this "magic" eavesdropping technology.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to say that secrecy is n't important , but once it requires a certain level of technology to eavesdrop then surely you just pick some random people and rough them up anyway telling the people you are intimidating that you have this " magic " eavesdropping technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to say that secrecy isn't important, but once it requires a certain level of technology to eavesdrop then surely you just pick some random people and rough them up anyway telling the people you are intimidating that you have this "magic" eavesdropping technology.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192710</id>
	<title>Re:As a person in the infosec field</title>
	<author>paul08</author>
	<datestamp>1258898760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ah just like the Zimbabwean system works fine until you beat up the people counting the bits of paper.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah just like the Zimbabwean system works fine until you beat up the people counting the bits of paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah just like the Zimbabwean system works fine until you beat up the people counting the bits of paper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191114</id>
	<title>Broken "secrecy"</title>
	<author>doug141</author>
	<datestamp>1258827000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps you read too quickly. "Secrecy," not "security." There are plenty of responses explaining the importance of secret ballots.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps you read too quickly .
" Secrecy , " not " security .
" There are plenty of responses explaining the importance of secret ballots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps you read too quickly.
"Secrecy," not "security.
" There are plenty of responses explaining the importance of secret ballots.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190798</id>
	<title>Who cares</title>
	<author>For a Free Internet</author>
	<datestamp>1258822800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's nobodoy to voat for anniwhey. REVOLUTIONNOWWWWW!!!!!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's nobodoy to voat for anniwhey .
REVOLUTIONNOWWWWW ! ! ! ! ! ! !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's nobodoy to voat for anniwhey.
REVOLUTIONNOWWWWW!!!!!!!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</id>
	<title>Honestly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258820040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>What options do you have to protect your self from Van eck phreaking? Lead casing? Foil voting boxes?

Honest replies welcome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What options do you have to protect your self from Van eck phreaking ?
Lead casing ?
Foil voting boxes ?
Honest replies welcome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What options do you have to protect your self from Van eck phreaking?
Lead casing?
Foil voting boxes?
Honest replies welcome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191968</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>fgrieu</author>
	<datestamp>1258883880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; What options do you have to protect your self from Van eck phreaking?</p><p>One option to consider seriously is: paper ballot inserted, in a voting booth protected by opaque curtain, into an opaque paper envelope, which is then publicly dropped into a transparent urn, which is left under public view during the voting, and publicly shaked before the counting process.</p><p>That's how 90\% of the votes are cast in France for decades [the "transparent" bit was added some 45 years ago]. Not only is it secure against Van Eck phreaking before its invention, it has great resilience against many kinds of fraud, and most voters are able to understand and check the process.</p><p>You still have to guard against quite a few things, including<br>* unsuitably opaque envelopes;<br>* bulletins printed on paper of different color/size/material [even if the envelope is opaque, it is usually not sealed, and sometime some portion of the bulletin (hopefully the back side, if the bulletin is folded) may be glanced at thru the opening; also the weight/stiffness of the bulletin may be revealing]<br>* hidden cameras in the voting booth; including those built into cellphones held by the voter [because the voter could be trying to prove what (s)he voted [in order to sell her/his vote or avoid retaliation if s/he did not vote as instructed].</p><p>Actually, in some locations much closer to you than half the circumference of planet earth, it may happen that voters are threatened to be beaten/killed is they do not vote as instructed; and maybe, on election day, a few of those who voted could be beaten publicly (often: regardless of what they actually voted, or based on their perceived opinion), in order to make the threat credible to those who did not vote yet. In these circumstances, the voters must be able to really trust the secrecy of their vote.</p><p>Fran&#231;ois Grieu</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; What options do you have to protect your self from Van eck phreaking ? One option to consider seriously is : paper ballot inserted , in a voting booth protected by opaque curtain , into an opaque paper envelope , which is then publicly dropped into a transparent urn , which is left under public view during the voting , and publicly shaked before the counting process.That 's how 90 \ % of the votes are cast in France for decades [ the " transparent " bit was added some 45 years ago ] .
Not only is it secure against Van Eck phreaking before its invention , it has great resilience against many kinds of fraud , and most voters are able to understand and check the process.You still have to guard against quite a few things , including * unsuitably opaque envelopes ; * bulletins printed on paper of different color/size/material [ even if the envelope is opaque , it is usually not sealed , and sometime some portion of the bulletin ( hopefully the back side , if the bulletin is folded ) may be glanced at thru the opening ; also the weight/stiffness of the bulletin may be revealing ] * hidden cameras in the voting booth ; including those built into cellphones held by the voter [ because the voter could be trying to prove what ( s ) he voted [ in order to sell her/his vote or avoid retaliation if s/he did not vote as instructed ] .Actually , in some locations much closer to you than half the circumference of planet earth , it may happen that voters are threatened to be beaten/killed is they do not vote as instructed ; and maybe , on election day , a few of those who voted could be beaten publicly ( often : regardless of what they actually voted , or based on their perceived opinion ) , in order to make the threat credible to those who did not vote yet .
In these circumstances , the voters must be able to really trust the secrecy of their vote.Fran   ois Grieu</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; What options do you have to protect your self from Van eck phreaking?One option to consider seriously is: paper ballot inserted, in a voting booth protected by opaque curtain, into an opaque paper envelope, which is then publicly dropped into a transparent urn, which is left under public view during the voting, and publicly shaked before the counting process.That's how 90\% of the votes are cast in France for decades [the "transparent" bit was added some 45 years ago].
Not only is it secure against Van Eck phreaking before its invention, it has great resilience against many kinds of fraud, and most voters are able to understand and check the process.You still have to guard against quite a few things, including* unsuitably opaque envelopes;* bulletins printed on paper of different color/size/material [even if the envelope is opaque, it is usually not sealed, and sometime some portion of the bulletin (hopefully the back side, if the bulletin is folded) may be glanced at thru the opening; also the weight/stiffness of the bulletin may be revealing]* hidden cameras in the voting booth; including those built into cellphones held by the voter [because the voter could be trying to prove what (s)he voted [in order to sell her/his vote or avoid retaliation if s/he did not vote as instructed].Actually, in some locations much closer to you than half the circumference of planet earth, it may happen that voters are threatened to be beaten/killed is they do not vote as instructed; and maybe, on election day, a few of those who voted could be beaten publicly (often: regardless of what they actually voted, or based on their perceived opinion), in order to make the threat credible to those who did not vote yet.
In these circumstances, the voters must be able to really trust the secrecy of their vote.François Grieu</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190996</id>
	<title>lol</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258825680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know a cheaper way. Install a frigging video camera, because then you can at least also see who went into the voting booth to vote against your favorite presidente.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know a cheaper way .
Install a frigging video camera , because then you can at least also see who went into the voting booth to vote against your favorite presidente .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know a cheaper way.
Install a frigging video camera, because then you can at least also see who went into the voting booth to vote against your favorite presidente.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30196440</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>obdulio1950</author>
	<datestamp>1258885860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The first time that this machines were used in nationwide in a presidential election, Fernando Cardozo was the president and the election was won by Lula da Silva, who was the opposition candidate.

So if the government that put this system in place lost the election, it means that it is pretty safe.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first time that this machines were used in nationwide in a presidential election , Fernando Cardozo was the president and the election was won by Lula da Silva , who was the opposition candidate .
So if the government that put this system in place lost the election , it means that it is pretty safe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first time that this machines were used in nationwide in a presidential election, Fernando Cardozo was the president and the election was won by Lula da Silva, who was the opposition candidate.
So if the government that put this system in place lost the election, it means that it is pretty safe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30205168</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb question...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259009280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It could still be a touch screen. When you press the part of the screen corresponding to your candidate, have nothing on the screen change, and have your vote indicated by an LED next to that part of the screen (as you said).</p><p>Or you could possibly have an LED array with buttons, to allow for an understandable confirmation dialogue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It could still be a touch screen .
When you press the part of the screen corresponding to your candidate , have nothing on the screen change , and have your vote indicated by an LED next to that part of the screen ( as you said ) .Or you could possibly have an LED array with buttons , to allow for an understandable confirmation dialogue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It could still be a touch screen.
When you press the part of the screen corresponding to your candidate, have nothing on the screen change, and have your vote indicated by an LED next to that part of the screen (as you said).Or you could possibly have an LED array with buttons, to allow for an understandable confirmation dialogue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190874</id>
	<title>It could be big...</title>
	<author>JazzyMusicMan</author>
	<datestamp>1258823580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If we could somehow reach a level where e-voting was secure, think of the possibilities. The people might actually be heard! Now whether you think that is a good thing or not, I leave as an exercise for the reader. But what I'm trying to say is, imagine voting from your home computer on issues that matter to you. No longer will your representatives be able to hand wave about what their constituency wants, heck, you might not even need representatives.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we could somehow reach a level where e-voting was secure , think of the possibilities .
The people might actually be heard !
Now whether you think that is a good thing or not , I leave as an exercise for the reader .
But what I 'm trying to say is , imagine voting from your home computer on issues that matter to you .
No longer will your representatives be able to hand wave about what their constituency wants , heck , you might not even need representatives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we could somehow reach a level where e-voting was secure, think of the possibilities.
The people might actually be heard!
Now whether you think that is a good thing or not, I leave as an exercise for the reader.
But what I'm trying to say is, imagine voting from your home computer on issues that matter to you.
No longer will your representatives be able to hand wave about what their constituency wants, heck, you might not even need representatives.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191622</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258920180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly. It's pretty safe. This shows that a random citizen is unlikely to give an election to Mickey Mouse on a whim.</p><p>Instead it would take someone with significant knowledge and even serious funding to sway an election. Probably not just a someone, but even an organization.</p><p>So the only way this could ever effect elections would be if there were an organization or group of conspiring individuals with significant monetary resources - AND for that group of people to feel that swaying an election would be in their interest - AND for that group of people to then be so immoral as to decide to do so.</p><p>Clearly such a confluence of conditions is so wildly improbable that we can effectively rule out its possibility.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
It 's pretty safe .
This shows that a random citizen is unlikely to give an election to Mickey Mouse on a whim.Instead it would take someone with significant knowledge and even serious funding to sway an election .
Probably not just a someone , but even an organization.So the only way this could ever effect elections would be if there were an organization or group of conspiring individuals with significant monetary resources - AND for that group of people to feel that swaying an election would be in their interest - AND for that group of people to then be so immoral as to decide to do so.Clearly such a confluence of conditions is so wildly improbable that we can effectively rule out its possibility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
It's pretty safe.
This shows that a random citizen is unlikely to give an election to Mickey Mouse on a whim.Instead it would take someone with significant knowledge and even serious funding to sway an election.
Probably not just a someone, but even an organization.So the only way this could ever effect elections would be if there were an organization or group of conspiring individuals with significant monetary resources - AND for that group of people to feel that swaying an election would be in their interest - AND for that group of people to then be so immoral as to decide to do so.Clearly such a confluence of conditions is so wildly improbable that we can effectively rule out its possibility.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192556</id>
	<title>Re:Van Eck Phreacking will always exist</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258896180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Being a Brazilian myself (but luckily relocated to Canada) I have to disagree with your "really free country" statement.</p><p>Brazil has a long history of abuse of power called voto de cabresto[1] and coronelismo [2] and although history books are willing to dismiss that as something from the past, it's still a common practice [3].</p><p>Of course, it's much more common just to give the voter a pair of shoes and a bag of potatoes in exchanges for his/her vote but the ones who may try to resist to such control maybe threatened to obey, since they vote is not really secret.</p><p>[1] http://www.tse.jus.br/internet/institucional/glossario-eleitoral/termos/voto\_cabresto.htm<br>[2] http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronelismo<br>[3] http://educacao.uol.com.br/atualidades/voto-de-cabresto.jhtm</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Being a Brazilian myself ( but luckily relocated to Canada ) I have to disagree with your " really free country " statement.Brazil has a long history of abuse of power called voto de cabresto [ 1 ] and coronelismo [ 2 ] and although history books are willing to dismiss that as something from the past , it 's still a common practice [ 3 ] .Of course , it 's much more common just to give the voter a pair of shoes and a bag of potatoes in exchanges for his/her vote but the ones who may try to resist to such control maybe threatened to obey , since they vote is not really secret .
[ 1 ] http : //www.tse.jus.br/internet/institucional/glossario-eleitoral/termos/voto \ _cabresto.htm [ 2 ] http : //pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronelismo [ 3 ] http : //educacao.uol.com.br/atualidades/voto-de-cabresto.jhtm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being a Brazilian myself (but luckily relocated to Canada) I have to disagree with your "really free country" statement.Brazil has a long history of abuse of power called voto de cabresto[1] and coronelismo [2] and although history books are willing to dismiss that as something from the past, it's still a common practice [3].Of course, it's much more common just to give the voter a pair of shoes and a bag of potatoes in exchanges for his/her vote but the ones who may try to resist to such control maybe threatened to obey, since they vote is not really secret.
[1] http://www.tse.jus.br/internet/institucional/glossario-eleitoral/termos/voto\_cabresto.htm[2] http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronelismo[3] http://educacao.uol.com.br/atualidades/voto-de-cabresto.jhtm</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193558</id>
	<title>Electronic voting in the largest democracy</title>
	<author>devendra\_l</author>
	<datestamp>1258906920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Simple electronic voting machine that is successfully used by the largest democracy in the world<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian\_voting\_machines" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian\_voting\_machines</a> [wikipedia.org]

btw, these machines are used in all sorts of conditions. In some remote places with no electricity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple electronic voting machine that is successfully used by the largest democracy in the world : - http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian \ _voting \ _machines [ wikipedia.org ] btw , these machines are used in all sorts of conditions .
In some remote places with no electricity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple electronic voting machine that is successfully used by the largest democracy in the world :-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian\_voting\_machines [wikipedia.org]

btw, these machines are used in all sorts of conditions.
In some remote places with no electricity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191964</id>
	<title>LED</title>
	<author>asCii88</author>
	<datestamp>1258883760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would suggest using a LED monochrome low-def display, after all, there is not much to be displayed, and make the selection buttons, hard buttons... but that might compromise the machines some other way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would suggest using a LED monochrome low-def display , after all , there is not much to be displayed , and make the selection buttons , hard buttons... but that might compromise the machines some other way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would suggest using a LED monochrome low-def display, after all, there is not much to be displayed, and make the selection buttons, hard buttons... but that might compromise the machines some other way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30199340</id>
	<title>True Democracy</title>
	<author>mahadiga</author>
	<datestamp>1258910640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Democracy is <i>sham</i> till Voter can openly disclose without <b>FEAR</b> to which Candidate he voted after coming out of the Polling Booth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Democracy is sham till Voter can openly disclose without FEAR to which Candidate he voted after coming out of the Polling Booth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Democracy is sham till Voter can openly disclose without FEAR to which Candidate he voted after coming out of the Polling Booth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192630</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>PopeRatzo</author>
	<datestamp>1258897860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What options do you have to protect your self from Van eck phreaking?</p></div></blockquote><p>As far as elections go, the best protection against Van eck phreaking is the paper ballot.</p><p>When you have poll-workers from each political party and lots of poll-watchers, it provides fair elections and really scales very well.  The only thing that scales well when you have electronic voting is the ability to perpetrate fraud.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What options do you have to protect your self from Van eck phreaking ? As far as elections go , the best protection against Van eck phreaking is the paper ballot.When you have poll-workers from each political party and lots of poll-watchers , it provides fair elections and really scales very well .
The only thing that scales well when you have electronic voting is the ability to perpetrate fraud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What options do you have to protect your self from Van eck phreaking?As far as elections go, the best protection against Van eck phreaking is the paper ballot.When you have poll-workers from each political party and lots of poll-watchers, it provides fair elections and really scales very well.
The only thing that scales well when you have electronic voting is the ability to perpetrate fraud.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190700</id>
	<title>I'm still not even at this step yet</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1258821240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not yet at "how do we get e-voting secure?". I'm still puzzled by the question "why the f. do we need it?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not yet at " how do we get e-voting secure ? " .
I 'm still puzzled by the question " why the f. do we need it ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not yet at "how do we get e-voting secure?".
I'm still puzzled by the question "why the f. do we need it?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191280</id>
	<title>You are all thinking way too hard about this</title>
	<author>Spazed</author>
	<datestamp>1258829160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Van Eck according to wikipedia: "Van Eck phreaking is the process of eavesdropping on the contents of a CRT and LCD display by detecting its electromagnetic emissions" So basically screen looking on Halo is Van Eck Phreaking. You are all doing it as you read this comment unless you printed it out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Van Eck according to wikipedia : " Van Eck phreaking is the process of eavesdropping on the contents of a CRT and LCD display by detecting its electromagnetic emissions " So basically screen looking on Halo is Van Eck Phreaking .
You are all doing it as you read this comment unless you printed it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Van Eck according to wikipedia: "Van Eck phreaking is the process of eavesdropping on the contents of a CRT and LCD display by detecting its electromagnetic emissions" So basically screen looking on Halo is Van Eck Phreaking.
You are all doing it as you read this comment unless you printed it out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192086</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258886460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Farady cage around the screen if it is fine enough then even if the screen is of the touch veriety it should cause no problem<br>and decent quality screened leads or you could go one better and purposley radiate hi levels of crap at the right frequencys  so that any little ouik trying to listen just gets crap i am sure that with a little bit of thought instead of blind panic it can be solved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Farady cage around the screen if it is fine enough then even if the screen is of the touch veriety it should cause no problemand decent quality screened leads or you could go one better and purposley radiate hi levels of crap at the right frequencys so that any little ouik trying to listen just gets crap i am sure that with a little bit of thought instead of blind panic it can be solved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Farady cage around the screen if it is fine enough then even if the screen is of the touch veriety it should cause no problemand decent quality screened leads or you could go one better and purposley radiate hi levels of crap at the right frequencys  so that any little ouik trying to listen just gets crap i am sure that with a little bit of thought instead of blind panic it can be solved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190674</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>robbak</author>
	<datestamp>1258820940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Several ideas. Of course, use LCDs, as the CRT circuitry is the bad one. Shield the data connections so they don't radiate too much. Make the connections that transmit unencrypted data short. Use low-contrast fonts, so the sharp edges do not cause large voltage (and therefore EMI) spikes. Randomise the low bits of data shown on the screen, so you create obfuscating noise.</p><p>Maybe you have to go as far as have a white noise transmitter to mask what you cannot elimiate. Plenty of room to move. Good on them for having such a contest - it flushed out all the 'Ooh, I didn't think of that' problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Several ideas .
Of course , use LCDs , as the CRT circuitry is the bad one .
Shield the data connections so they do n't radiate too much .
Make the connections that transmit unencrypted data short .
Use low-contrast fonts , so the sharp edges do not cause large voltage ( and therefore EMI ) spikes .
Randomise the low bits of data shown on the screen , so you create obfuscating noise.Maybe you have to go as far as have a white noise transmitter to mask what you can not elimiate .
Plenty of room to move .
Good on them for having such a contest - it flushed out all the 'Ooh , I did n't think of that ' problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Several ideas.
Of course, use LCDs, as the CRT circuitry is the bad one.
Shield the data connections so they don't radiate too much.
Make the connections that transmit unencrypted data short.
Use low-contrast fonts, so the sharp edges do not cause large voltage (and therefore EMI) spikes.
Randomise the low bits of data shown on the screen, so you create obfuscating noise.Maybe you have to go as far as have a white noise transmitter to mask what you cannot elimiate.
Plenty of room to move.
Good on them for having such a contest - it flushed out all the 'Ooh, I didn't think of that' problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30195642</id>
	<title>Re:Whew, that was a close one...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258922340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What's the most someone could do with this exploit?</i></p><p>A little context is needed in order to further explore this point. Brazil is a huge country, of continental dimensions. Voting is a mandatory civic duty (except for older citizens). In the remote and impoverished areas, intimidating voters or buying votes was a common, widespread practice, constituting what is termed an "electoral corral", that helped maintain veritable "political dynasties" in these areas for decades. One of the selling points of electronic voting was being tamper-proof, reducing the probability of fraud. There are myriad ways to make the political scale tip to the wrong side, the side that represents not what the people want, but what the-powers-that-be command...Remember the "pregnant chads" issue in Florida?</p><p>It's easy to imagine setting up electronic gadgets in these very remote, impoverished and forsaken little towns in Brazil, in order to verify that the voter indeed kept his/her word when he "sold" his/her vote or to enhance <b>intimidation or voter harassment</b>, all under the unknowing eyes of the Electoral Justice officer (in Brazil, there's a branch of the Judiciary specifically to take care of electoral issues, such as enforcing legislation, etc.).</p><p>Besides, one of the pillars of democracies is having the right to vote and this right must be protected from <b>prying eyes of the State (and by extension, the ruling political party)</b>, lest the voting process becomes thwarted and non-representative of the will of the people, as well as to avoid <b>political persecution</b> of those who dared to vote for an opposing party. This is so in any country that has a serious voting process and now, you, noble tech nerd and Slashdot reader, knows why this is so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the most someone could do with this exploit ? A little context is needed in order to further explore this point .
Brazil is a huge country , of continental dimensions .
Voting is a mandatory civic duty ( except for older citizens ) .
In the remote and impoverished areas , intimidating voters or buying votes was a common , widespread practice , constituting what is termed an " electoral corral " , that helped maintain veritable " political dynasties " in these areas for decades .
One of the selling points of electronic voting was being tamper-proof , reducing the probability of fraud .
There are myriad ways to make the political scale tip to the wrong side , the side that represents not what the people want , but what the-powers-that-be command...Remember the " pregnant chads " issue in Florida ? It 's easy to imagine setting up electronic gadgets in these very remote , impoverished and forsaken little towns in Brazil , in order to verify that the voter indeed kept his/her word when he " sold " his/her vote or to enhance intimidation or voter harassment , all under the unknowing eyes of the Electoral Justice officer ( in Brazil , there 's a branch of the Judiciary specifically to take care of electoral issues , such as enforcing legislation , etc .
) .Besides , one of the pillars of democracies is having the right to vote and this right must be protected from prying eyes of the State ( and by extension , the ruling political party ) , lest the voting process becomes thwarted and non-representative of the will of the people , as well as to avoid political persecution of those who dared to vote for an opposing party .
This is so in any country that has a serious voting process and now , you , noble tech nerd and Slashdot reader , knows why this is so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the most someone could do with this exploit?A little context is needed in order to further explore this point.
Brazil is a huge country, of continental dimensions.
Voting is a mandatory civic duty (except for older citizens).
In the remote and impoverished areas, intimidating voters or buying votes was a common, widespread practice, constituting what is termed an "electoral corral", that helped maintain veritable "political dynasties" in these areas for decades.
One of the selling points of electronic voting was being tamper-proof, reducing the probability of fraud.
There are myriad ways to make the political scale tip to the wrong side, the side that represents not what the people want, but what the-powers-that-be command...Remember the "pregnant chads" issue in Florida?It's easy to imagine setting up electronic gadgets in these very remote, impoverished and forsaken little towns in Brazil, in order to verify that the voter indeed kept his/her word when he "sold" his/her vote or to enhance intimidation or voter harassment, all under the unknowing eyes of the Electoral Justice officer (in Brazil, there's a branch of the Judiciary specifically to take care of electoral issues, such as enforcing legislation, etc.
).Besides, one of the pillars of democracies is having the right to vote and this right must be protected from prying eyes of the State (and by extension, the ruling political party), lest the voting process becomes thwarted and non-representative of the will of the people, as well as to avoid political persecution of those who dared to vote for an opposing party.
This is so in any country that has a serious voting process and now, you, noble tech nerd and Slashdot reader, knows why this is so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191594</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>Z00L00K</author>
	<datestamp>1258833360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Randomize the image for each voting.</p><p>This will make it a lot harder to decide the selection for each individual voter since the image will be different for each voter.</p><p>So - yes you may be able to recognize that a voted did make a selection but you won't know what the selection really was unless you have some very expensive equipment.</p><p>And as a voter I wouldn't be too worried about that kind of eavesdropping. Who besides the authorities would really be interested in the vote of an individual person bad enough to use the Van Eck phreaking method to see which option that was selected? There are easier methods - like hidden cameras.</p><p>And also - the Van Eck phreaking method won't impact the actual vote, so you can't change the outcome of the election using that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Randomize the image for each voting.This will make it a lot harder to decide the selection for each individual voter since the image will be different for each voter.So - yes you may be able to recognize that a voted did make a selection but you wo n't know what the selection really was unless you have some very expensive equipment.And as a voter I would n't be too worried about that kind of eavesdropping .
Who besides the authorities would really be interested in the vote of an individual person bad enough to use the Van Eck phreaking method to see which option that was selected ?
There are easier methods - like hidden cameras.And also - the Van Eck phreaking method wo n't impact the actual vote , so you ca n't change the outcome of the election using that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Randomize the image for each voting.This will make it a lot harder to decide the selection for each individual voter since the image will be different for each voter.So - yes you may be able to recognize that a voted did make a selection but you won't know what the selection really was unless you have some very expensive equipment.And as a voter I wouldn't be too worried about that kind of eavesdropping.
Who besides the authorities would really be interested in the vote of an individual person bad enough to use the Van Eck phreaking method to see which option that was selected?
There are easier methods - like hidden cameras.And also - the Van Eck phreaking method won't impact the actual vote, so you can't change the outcome of the election using that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192554</id>
	<title>Re:Whew, that was a close one...</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1258896180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As long as you didn't vote unamericanly I guess you don't have to worry...</htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as you did n't vote unamericanly I guess you do n't have to worry.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as you didn't vote unamericanly I guess you don't have to worry...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191018</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>blueg3</author>
	<datestamp>1258825920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The NSA Tempest guidelines are probably sufficient.</p><p>Of course, the requirements are potentially made weaker by what you're eavesdropping. Tempest is written assuming that eavesdropping is a problem, but that's not true with voting -- it's only a problem if you are then able to associate votes with individuals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The NSA Tempest guidelines are probably sufficient.Of course , the requirements are potentially made weaker by what you 're eavesdropping .
Tempest is written assuming that eavesdropping is a problem , but that 's not true with voting -- it 's only a problem if you are then able to associate votes with individuals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The NSA Tempest guidelines are probably sufficient.Of course, the requirements are potentially made weaker by what you're eavesdropping.
Tempest is written assuming that eavesdropping is a problem, but that's not true with voting -- it's only a problem if you are then able to associate votes with individuals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191130</id>
	<title>Van Eck Phreacking will always exist</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258827180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ok.. this is been around for a while and in fact could even work for paper voting...<br>
I'm sure someone could use strategically disposed microphones to detect the position of the "X" on the paper.. <br>

Until someone starts changing the results of elections (which will always be possible given "the right" flapping of a butterfly's wings) I won't be bothered. If your country really is free (something that Brazil is good at) there is no problem telling everybody who you voted on..<br>
Vote's anonymity only makes it easier to fake elections.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok.. this is been around for a while and in fact could even work for paper voting.. . I 'm sure someone could use strategically disposed microphones to detect the position of the " X " on the paper. . Until someone starts changing the results of elections ( which will always be possible given " the right " flapping of a butterfly 's wings ) I wo n't be bothered .
If your country really is free ( something that Brazil is good at ) there is no problem telling everybody who you voted on. . Vote 's anonymity only makes it easier to fake elections .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok.. this is been around for a while and in fact could even work for paper voting...
I'm sure someone could use strategically disposed microphones to detect the position of the "X" on the paper.. 

Until someone starts changing the results of elections (which will always be possible given "the right" flapping of a butterfly's wings) I won't be bothered.
If your country really is free (something that Brazil is good at) there is no problem telling everybody who you voted on..
Vote's anonymity only makes it easier to fake elections.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192792</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb question...</title>
	<author>C0vardeAn0nim0</author>
	<datestamp>1258900020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>because here in brasil we don't have voting districts, so in state and federal elections, a candidate from santos (a sea-side city in sao paulo state, some 80 km east of the state capital) can receive votes from people in ribeir&#227;o preto (a city 400 km west of the capital). this makes the candidate lists for federal and state deputies something in the thousands.</p><p>our voting system uses numbers. each party is assigned a number (ex. PP=11, PDT=12, PT=13, etc.) and every candidate have a number prefixed with the party number (we don't have "independant" candidates. to run for anything you need to join a party). so when you go to the voting booth, you just type the candidate numbers, one candidate per screen. usually the screen order is:</p><p>- president<br>- governor<br>- senator (one screen when only one seat is in dispute, 2 screens otherwise)<br>- federal deputy<br>- state deputy</p><p>federal and state elections are held every four years and always coincide. municipal elections are held separatelly in between federal/state elections. the screen order is usually:</p><p>- mayor<br>- municipal legislator (vereador in portuguese).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>because here in brasil we do n't have voting districts , so in state and federal elections , a candidate from santos ( a sea-side city in sao paulo state , some 80 km east of the state capital ) can receive votes from people in ribeir   o preto ( a city 400 km west of the capital ) .
this makes the candidate lists for federal and state deputies something in the thousands.our voting system uses numbers .
each party is assigned a number ( ex .
PP = 11 , PDT = 12 , PT = 13 , etc .
) and every candidate have a number prefixed with the party number ( we do n't have " independant " candidates .
to run for anything you need to join a party ) .
so when you go to the voting booth , you just type the candidate numbers , one candidate per screen .
usually the screen order is : - president- governor- senator ( one screen when only one seat is in dispute , 2 screens otherwise ) - federal deputy- state deputyfederal and state elections are held every four years and always coincide .
municipal elections are held separatelly in between federal/state elections .
the screen order is usually : - mayor- municipal legislator ( vereador in portuguese ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because here in brasil we don't have voting districts, so in state and federal elections, a candidate from santos (a sea-side city in sao paulo state, some 80 km east of the state capital) can receive votes from people in ribeirão preto (a city 400 km west of the capital).
this makes the candidate lists for federal and state deputies something in the thousands.our voting system uses numbers.
each party is assigned a number (ex.
PP=11, PDT=12, PT=13, etc.
) and every candidate have a number prefixed with the party number (we don't have "independant" candidates.
to run for anything you need to join a party).
so when you go to the voting booth, you just type the candidate numbers, one candidate per screen.
usually the screen order is:- president- governor- senator (one screen when only one seat is in dispute, 2 screens otherwise)- federal deputy- state deputyfederal and state elections are held every four years and always coincide.
municipal elections are held separatelly in between federal/state elections.
the screen order is usually:- mayor- municipal legislator (vereador in portuguese).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192352</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>RiotingPacifist</author>
	<datestamp>1258891800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If i read the article correctly he is Van ecking the keyboard, so randomizing the button-&gt;candidate mapping should be enough. However for Van ecking you build a Faraday cage around the device (a pita that may not be possible for voting booths you need to get in/out of),   or use active electronic countermeasures, this is not 100\% safe, as your basically engaging in a race of creating random noise, vs filtering it, but that is a race that the jammers can generally win so 99.999\%, in addition as the detectors will have to use antennas of a certain length, it may be possible to use scanners to detect listening devices (that is a race you probably can't win, but it may be enough to scare people away from trying to do this for real.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If i read the article correctly he is Van ecking the keyboard , so randomizing the button- &gt; candidate mapping should be enough .
However for Van ecking you build a Faraday cage around the device ( a pita that may not be possible for voting booths you need to get in/out of ) , or use active electronic countermeasures , this is not 100 \ % safe , as your basically engaging in a race of creating random noise , vs filtering it , but that is a race that the jammers can generally win so 99.999 \ % , in addition as the detectors will have to use antennas of a certain length , it may be possible to use scanners to detect listening devices ( that is a race you probably ca n't win , but it may be enough to scare people away from trying to do this for real .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If i read the article correctly he is Van ecking the keyboard, so randomizing the button-&gt;candidate mapping should be enough.
However for Van ecking you build a Faraday cage around the device (a pita that may not be possible for voting booths you need to get in/out of),   or use active electronic countermeasures, this is not 100\% safe, as your basically engaging in a race of creating random noise, vs filtering it, but that is a race that the jammers can generally win so 99.999\%, in addition as the detectors will have to use antennas of a certain length, it may be possible to use scanners to detect listening devices (that is a race you probably can't win, but it may be enough to scare people away from trying to do this for real.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191486</id>
	<title>Re:I'm still not even at this step yet</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1258831860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because it's more convenient and the count should be more reliable. If it's secure, that should be enough.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because it 's more convenient and the count should be more reliable .
If it 's secure , that should be enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because it's more convenient and the count should be more reliable.
If it's secure, that should be enough.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190700</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190626</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258820340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's simple. just throw out the person with the radar dish, oscilliscope, and notepad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's simple .
just throw out the person with the radar dish , oscilliscope , and notepad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's simple.
just throw out the person with the radar dish, oscilliscope, and notepad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191540</id>
	<title>Dumb question...</title>
	<author>EricX2</author>
	<datestamp>1258832520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why does the electronic voting machine have to be a touch screen? Why not a list of the options with buttons with an LED in them that light up when you press the button? The list could be on a separate display next to the buttons but nothing changes therefore the 'van eck phreaker' would only get the data on the screen, not the option picked... but I have no knowledge of this sort of stuff.</p><p>Maybe some places do that, but where I live we do vote by mail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does the electronic voting machine have to be a touch screen ?
Why not a list of the options with buttons with an LED in them that light up when you press the button ?
The list could be on a separate display next to the buttons but nothing changes therefore the 'van eck phreaker ' would only get the data on the screen , not the option picked... but I have no knowledge of this sort of stuff.Maybe some places do that , but where I live we do vote by mail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does the electronic voting machine have to be a touch screen?
Why not a list of the options with buttons with an LED in them that light up when you press the button?
The list could be on a separate display next to the buttons but nothing changes therefore the 'van eck phreaker' would only get the data on the screen, not the option picked... but I have no knowledge of this sort of stuff.Maybe some places do that, but where I live we do vote by mail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193612</id>
	<title>Re:I'm still not even at this step yet</title>
	<author>cristianok</author>
	<datestamp>1258907340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It saves a lot of time. In Brazil, the election results are known in the evening of the election day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It saves a lot of time .
In Brazil , the election results are known in the evening of the election day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It saves a lot of time.
In Brazil, the election results are known in the evening of the election day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190700</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193144</id>
	<title>It's not a practical approach</title>
	<author>SlappyBastard</author>
	<datestamp>1258903740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While in principle it is a good method for snooping a single monitor, it would take a ton of disentangling signals to read every monitor consistently at a polling place from any distance.  It is not a practical way to screw with an election, considering that any party willing to snoop this aggressively is probably willing to do a lot more than just snoop.</p><p>Frankly, it shows just how effective Brazil's security measures are that hackers have to go this deep into the playbook to get even one sort of result.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While in principle it is a good method for snooping a single monitor , it would take a ton of disentangling signals to read every monitor consistently at a polling place from any distance .
It is not a practical way to screw with an election , considering that any party willing to snoop this aggressively is probably willing to do a lot more than just snoop.Frankly , it shows just how effective Brazil 's security measures are that hackers have to go this deep into the playbook to get even one sort of result .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While in principle it is a good method for snooping a single monitor, it would take a ton of disentangling signals to read every monitor consistently at a polling place from any distance.
It is not a practical way to screw with an election, considering that any party willing to snoop this aggressively is probably willing to do a lot more than just snoop.Frankly, it shows just how effective Brazil's security measures are that hackers have to go this deep into the playbook to get even one sort of result.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191862</id>
	<title>Re:Physical Security</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258881060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Outside Broadcast Van - just pretend to be from the local TV-station.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Outside Broadcast Van - just pretend to be from the local TV-station .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Outside Broadcast Van - just pretend to be from the local TV-station.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190656</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30196440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30195642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30198842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30202930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30200916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30199340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30205168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191130
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30194200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30197178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_027229_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_027229.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191130
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_027229.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193454
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_027229.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190756
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191794
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191622
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30196440
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192380
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30202930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190626
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190690
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190622
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30200916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190860
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190674
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192080
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191164
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_027229.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192792
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30194200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30205168
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_027229.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190874
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_027229.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191150
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_027229.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190640
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190792
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191184
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193790
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30195642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190804
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_027229.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193880
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_027229.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191964
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_027229.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30197178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30198842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30192710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30193674
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30199340
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_027229.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190764
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_027229.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30190656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_027229.30191862
</commentlist>
</conversation>
