as to the question in title:
Do you trust Microsoft staff aND their App to tally elections?
- Thread starter Losttribe
- Start date
ADevilYouKhow
Rhyme Reason
Smaller companies or the states probably have less incentive to rig a vote, plus there's less political pressure when it comes to policing them. How easy is it to see some congressman likeif they had to investigate Microsoft for vote rigging?
Well I can point out gerrymandering and politicized nature of the them and then smaller companies being used as pawns essentially throwaways.
MICROSOFT CALLS IOWA FOR HILLARY BEFORE IT HELPS COUNT THE VOTE
Sanders supporters concerned over impartiality
Paul Joseph Watson - FEBRUARY 1, 2016 524 Comments
IMAGE CREDITS: ASLAN MEDIA / FLICKR.
1.9K
60
19
Microsoft’s Bing technology has called Iowa for Hillary Clinton, a result that has not gone unnoticed amongst Bernie Sanders supporters given that an app created by Microsoft will help tally the vote during tonight’s caucus.
Using, “data from polls, prediction markets, and anonymized and aggregated search-engine queries to predict its results,”Microsoft forecaststhat Hillary will win three out of the first four Democratic primaries, taking Iowa, South Carolina and Nevada, with Sanders taking New Hampshire.
Although the technology isn’t perfect, Microsoft correctly predicted the outcome of the 2015 Academy Awards, the ‘No’ vote for Scottish independence, and the outcome of more than 95 percent of the 2014 U.S. midterm elections.
That track record is causing consternation amongst some Bernie Sanders supporters, who have pointed out a potential conflict of interest given that precinct officials will be using an app created by Microsoft to report caucus results.
Last week, Pete D’Alessandro, who is running Sanders’ Iowa campaign, questioned the impartiality of the app,telling MSNBC, “You’d have to ask yourself why they’d want to give something like that away for free.”
Some fear that hackers could penetrate the cloud network on which the app runs in order to skew the vote.
“Closed source technologies from companies like Microsoft could, in theory, contain backdoors or vulnerabilities that hackers and evildoers could exploit. Even worse, Microsoft or its employees could purposely alter voting software to influence outcomes,”writes Brian Fagioli.
Both the Sanders and Clinton campaigns have built independent reporting systems based on the Microsoft app.
Microsoft has numerous ties to the Clintons, the most notable being Mark Penn,once describedas Hillary’s “pollster, chief strategist and message guru all wrapped into one.”
Up until June last year, Penn was also Executive Vice President and Chief Strategy Officer at Microsoft Corporation. In 2014, Penn created an ad campaign thatTime’s Laura Stampler speculatedwas a, “slick, subliminal and one-hundred percent free endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.”
Microsoft Calls Iowa For Hillary Before it Helps Count the Vote
Sanders supporters concerned over impartiality
Paul Joseph Watson - FEBRUARY 1, 2016 524 Comments
IMAGE CREDITS: ASLAN MEDIA / FLICKR.
1.9K
60
19
Microsoft’s Bing technology has called Iowa for Hillary Clinton, a result that has not gone unnoticed amongst Bernie Sanders supporters given that an app created by Microsoft will help tally the vote during tonight’s caucus.
Using, “data from polls, prediction markets, and anonymized and aggregated search-engine queries to predict its results,”Microsoft forecaststhat Hillary will win three out of the first four Democratic primaries, taking Iowa, South Carolina and Nevada, with Sanders taking New Hampshire.
Although the technology isn’t perfect, Microsoft correctly predicted the outcome of the 2015 Academy Awards, the ‘No’ vote for Scottish independence, and the outcome of more than 95 percent of the 2014 U.S. midterm elections.
That track record is causing consternation amongst some Bernie Sanders supporters, who have pointed out a potential conflict of interest given that precinct officials will be using an app created by Microsoft to report caucus results.
Last week, Pete D’Alessandro, who is running Sanders’ Iowa campaign, questioned the impartiality of the app,telling MSNBC, “You’d have to ask yourself why they’d want to give something like that away for free.”
Some fear that hackers could penetrate the cloud network on which the app runs in order to skew the vote.
“Closed source technologies from companies like Microsoft could, in theory, contain backdoors or vulnerabilities that hackers and evildoers could exploit. Even worse, Microsoft or its employees could purposely alter voting software to influence outcomes,”writes Brian Fagioli.
Both the Sanders and Clinton campaigns have built independent reporting systems based on the Microsoft app.
Microsoft has numerous ties to the Clintons, the most notable being Mark Penn,once describedas Hillary’s “pollster, chief strategist and message guru all wrapped into one.”
Up until June last year, Penn was also Executive Vice President and Chief Strategy Officer at Microsoft Corporation. In 2014, Penn created an ad campaign thatTime’s Laura Stampler speculatedwas a, “slick, subliminal and one-hundred percent free endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.”
Microsoft Calls Iowa For Hillary Before it Helps Count the Vote
Domingo Halliburton
Handmade in USA
This guy forget what the 'MS' in MSNBC stands for?
Smaller companies or the states probably have less incentive to rig a vote, plus there's less political pressure when it comes to policing them. How easy is it to see some congressman like
If anything, it'd probably be harder for larger companies/the state to rig an election, simply because you'd have to have more people cooperating.
It's probably a lot easier to pay off a tiny company with a staff of 10 people and get away with it than it is to get a large company to do something like that. Not because larger companies are inherently more ethical, but just because the larger number of people means there's a better chance that somebody on the inside will snitch and/or refuse to cooperate. Regardless of how much money you have, it's easier to bribe five people than it is to bribe 50...bigger chance that out of that 50, somebody won't play ball.
It's the same reason that moon landing conspiracy theories don't work. There's no way you could get all of the 100s of people involved to cooperate with something like that.
can't be any worse than the days of southern sheriffs just dumping boxes of ballots from the precincts more likely to vote a certain way.
