"Some observers have opined that vendors of flawed voting system products should pay: whether damages, or fines, or doing the migration gratis, or something. But consider this deeper question, from UCB and Princeton’s Joe Hall:
'Can this market support a regulatory/business model where vendors can’t charge for upgrades and have to absorb costs due to flaws that testing and certification didn’t find? (And every software product, period, has them).The funding for a high level of quality assurance has to come from somewhere, and that’s not voting system customers right now. Perhaps we’re getting to the point where the amount of effort it takes to produce a robust voting system and get it certified — at the vendor’s expense — creates a cost that customers are not willing or able to pay when the product gets to market.'
PS – Part Two, coming soon: a way out of the spiral."
The entire article, with commenting, is at http://www.trustthevote.org/voting-system-decertification-another-example-of-the-broken-market-1-of-2
Remember, "voting turnout and activism means spreading the word!"
No comments:
Post a Comment