D.C. Election Glitch Blamed On Equipment
Washington Post
D.C. election officials blamed a defective computer memory cartridge yesterday for producing what appeared to be thousands of write-in votes that officials say did not exist.
Ah, the return of the "glitch".
As I have stated before, "glitch" is a word the press likes to use anytime they discuss computer failures. The word conveys a problem, but doesn't assign blame to anyone. Things just mysteriously happen.
I wonder if they would refer to the collapse of the bridge in Minnesota as the result of a "glitch".
No, of course not. The bridge collapsed because people failed to perform the proper maintenance on it, and allowed serious structural failures to go untreated.
Same with computers. Recovering from a hardware failure is the acid test of a well written program. In this case, the software failed the test, since it allowed phantom votes to register.
"It was determined that one defective cartridge caused vote totals to be duplicated into multiple races on the summary report issued by our office. The Board immediately caught and addressed this error, as is reflected in the last unofficial results report issued on Election Night," Murphy said in the statement.
This is the hallmark of bad software. A good programmer anticipates errors, especially hardware failures, they even have a name for it, they call it "error-trapping".
He refused to answer questions from reporters, and no members of the election board appeared.
Of course, this assumes that the cause of the problem is being accurately reported to the press, which is a risky bet most of the time, especially since election boards seldom have their own programmers of techs on staff. The usual routine is to repeat whatever the vendor told them happened, and not answer questions which would reveal that they are simply reading lines from a script and have no clue what they are talking about.
I am not the only one who is skeptical.
"That press release is a model of obfuscation," said Henry E. Brady, a professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley who has studied voting systems extensively, including in the deadlocked 2000 presidential contest.
The explanation that a defective cartridge caused tallying errors across multiple races "is what throws me off," Brady said. "It is hard to know what that means. I'm having trouble figuring out how that happens."