MISUSE OF EVM _ PART -13
• New voter verifiable paper trail (VVPT) machines to replace the EVMs, following doubts that it could be tampered.Voting Machines are “Calculators which can be manipulated by computer softwares”. New Machines are ordered by EC, where a paper slip will come out with EVM voting which will be then deposited in a box. What is the use? Paper Slip will show that voter has casted vote for “Party A”, but calculator software will add vote to “Party B”! The Computers are programmable. No use for such fake paper slips. In Superior Courts it has been demonstrated how these computers can be manipulated and how it can be pre-programmed to make sure victory to one candidate during election. The EVM machines have killed Democracy and have all the potentials to do so. The ruling castes are manipulating EVMs to make sure victory to them depriving the dipressed classes to enable them to acquire the MASTER KEY that can unlock all doors of progress to the entire people.
• Under such circumstances the following exposure by media had no relevance during the last Karnataka Assembly Elections 2013 where the Congress won and the trend will continue in the forth coming General Elections until the Superior Court and the upholders of Democracy including the free and fair media. 8 Barriers to Open Source Voting Systems
In addition to the restricted environment for open source business models discussed in the last section, there are also significant regulatory, economic, organizational and perceptional barriers to the use and development of open source software in the voting systems market. In terms of voting system regulation, any changes in system source code trigger system recertification at all levels. Unlike traditional open source software where the ability to change the software frequently is important, open source voting system software development would have to operate differently and take into account that once a product is out on the market, it will be very difficult to change or “patch'’ the software. In addition, federal and most state certification processes are evaluations of an end-to-end system; it will be insufficient to simply develop the software, as any successful certification will have to include hardware, documentation, and procedures in addition to the software.
Even with sufficient attention to planning and development, it will still be difficult for small firms or non-profits to get a foothold in the elections systems market. It takes quite a bit of infrastructure and financial backing to be able to develop, certify, market, implement and service voting systems. Federal certification alone can take from two months to a year and cost between $150,000 and $400,000 for a single voting system.78Contractual performance bonds — where a vendor puts a certain percentage of the cost of a contract in escrow until the system has performed according to a set of criteria in the contract — can be hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars. Due to the nature of state and federal voting systems standards and guidelines, voting systems must be certified as end-to-end voting systems — including precinct-tabulation, data storage and central tabulation — or a vendor of a subsystem has to team up with a larger firm that has the missing pieces and is willing to sponsor a full system certification.79
Of course, other pieces of a voting system business outside of code development need to be in place to field a product. To support the requirements of certifying and marketing an end-to-end system, an open source voting systems vendor will need to have a support organization the likes of which no other open source software applications have had to develop. Some open source businesses such as MySQL AB and SugarCRM do have extensive marketing and support infrastructures for their paying customers, but no open source business produces a product like an end-to-end voting system with on-site support where software, hardware, documentation and procedures are developed, evaluated, marketed, sold and maintained throughout the lifetime of the product.
Finally, in addition to these regulatory, economic and organizational barriers, there are a number of perceptional barriers related to voting system customers that an open source voting system vendor would have to overcome. First, voting system customers — typically local election officials — might not understand the debate around disclosure and system security. The intuitive view is that disclosing system source code will result in a less-secure system. Vendors will have to take care to explain the arguments against “security through obscurity'’ and how openly published algorithms, for example in cryptography, have proven more robust to attack. Also, to make a sale, open source vendors will need to be able to demonstrate that the organizational structure they choose will be able to support the system over its lifetime or provide alternatives to such support if the vendor goes out of business.
[BJT Vol II (I), Page 588] [\x 588/]
Ime kho panàyasmanto satta adhikaraõasamathà dhammà uddesaü àgacchanti.
Uppannuppannànaü adhikaraõànaü samathàya våpasamàya:
Uddiññhà kho àyasmanto satta adhikaraõasamathà dhammà.
Tatthàyasmante pucchàmi: kaccittha parisuddhà?
Dutiyam-pi pucchàmi: kaccittha parisuddhà?
Tatiyam-pi pucchàmi: kaccittha parisuddhà?
Parisuddhetthàyasmanto, tasmà tuõhã, evam-etaü dhàrayàmi.
Uddiññhaü kho àyasmanto nidànaü.
Uddiññhà cattàro pàràjikà dhammà.
Uddiññhà terasa saïghàdisesà dhammà.
Uddiññhà dve aniyatà dhammà.
Uddiññhà tiüsa nissaggiyà pàcittiyà dhammà
Uddiññhà dvenavuti pàcittiyà dhammà.
Uddiññhà cattàro pàñidesanãyà dhammà.
Uddiññhà sekhiyà dhammà.
Uddiññhà satta adhikaraõasamathà dhammà.
Ettakaü tassa Bhagavato suttàgataü suttapariyàpannaü anvaddhamàsaü
uddesaü àgacchati. Tattha sabbeheva samaggehi sammodamànehi
29 Editor’s note: BJT omits this title by mistake. The Pàñidesanãya rules are listed only as Pañhama-, Dutiya-, etc. there being no distinctive titles for these training rules either in BJT or ChS.
30 BJT note: Ekassa ce pi - ChS
31 Editor’s note: BJT has no distinctive titles for the Sekhiya training rules, they are listed there as Pañhama-, Dutiya-, etc. up to Dasama-, after which they start again with Pañhama-.
As the titles serve a useful function as mnemonics they have been
inserted here following the ChS editon of the Bhikkhupàtimokkhapàëi. At
the beginning of this section as the rules generally come in pairs no
title for the second rule is given.
32 BJT note: Thåpakato - ChS.
33 Editor’s note: BJT, Bhãyyokamyataü, but it’s normal practice is to write these forms as bhãyo- etc.
34 Editor’s note: BJT, bhu¤jissàmi-ti, printer’s error.
35 Editor’s note: BJT, bhå¤jissàmã-ti, printer’s error.
36 Editor’s note: BJT, desessàmi-ti, here but desissàmã-ti elsewhere.
VOICE OF SARVA SAMAJ
Expect e-voter slips in Lok Sabha elections
Under such circumstances the following exposure by media had no
relevance during the last Karnataka Assembly Elections 2013 where the
Congress won and the trend will continue in the forth coming General
Elections until the Superior Court and the upholders of Democracy
including the free and fair media to ensure Open Source Voting Systems.
In UP EC has to drape all bicycles as the elephants with raised trunks
were draped in the last UP Assembly elections.