<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ethical licensing for electronic voting software</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gnuosphere.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/ethical-licensing-for-electronic-voting-software/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gnuosphere.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/ethical-licensing-for-electronic-voting-software/</link>
	<description>to compute freely</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 15:58:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://gnuosphere.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/ethical-licensing-for-electronic-voting-software/#comment-622</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 15:17:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gnuosphere.wordpress.com/?p=200#comment-622</guid>
		<description>&quot;banning&quot; is extreme. you are correct. But an intangible-only record should be considered, by default, an undemocratic vote. Such government practice should be banned. Would you agree? Where in the world is this potential for corruption currently practiced? How about the US? Is it different from state to state, county to county, city to city, etc.?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;banning&#8221; is extreme. you are correct. But an intangible-only record should be considered, by default, an undemocratic vote. Such government practice should be banned. Would you agree? Where in the world is this potential for corruption currently practiced? How about the US? Is it different from state to state, county to county, city to city, etc.?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Luis Villa</title>
		<link>http://gnuosphere.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/ethical-licensing-for-electronic-voting-software/#comment-613</link>
		<dc:creator>Luis Villa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 02:14:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gnuosphere.wordpress.com/?p=200#comment-613</guid>
		<description>As &lt;a href=&quot;http://tieguy.org/blog/2006/09/17/red-hat-voting-followups/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;I&#039;ve pointed out elsewhere&lt;/a&gt;, I think the concept of banning e-voting altogether depends on a very naive view of the security of paper ballots. I&#039;d certainly be in favor of banning any voting that didn&#039;t do (at a minimum) VVPAT, and ideally some sort of crypto-based verification, but to ban e-voting together throws the baby out with the bathwater.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As <a href="http://tieguy.org/blog/2006/09/17/red-hat-voting-followups/" rel="nofollow">I&#8217;ve pointed out elsewhere</a>, I think the concept of banning e-voting altogether depends on a very naive view of the security of paper ballots. I&#8217;d certainly be in favor of banning any voting that didn&#8217;t do (at a minimum) VVPAT, and ideally some sort of crypto-based verification, but to ban e-voting together throws the baby out with the bathwater.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
