I concur. A development methodology ("open source") will not address any of the deficiencies (when viewed from the voter's perspective, the perspective that should matter most) of voting. No matter how much one trusts a voting program, there's no way to be sure that the computer used for voting is running only software one trusts. No electronic system can compete with the simplicity and recount-friendly approach of what is called for here: voter-verified paper ballots.

So address to the question in the /. summary: You never should have stopped using voter-verified paper ballots.

There are computers one can purchase that do as the parent post specified—the voter feeds in a blank ballot (one which they could have filled out manually if desired) and the computer (which has a scanner and printer attached) will scan the ballot, help the voter by showing the choices on a screen, reading the ballot aloud, or reading the ballot text to headphones, and then collect votes from the voter. Then the computer's printer will print the voter's votes on the paper ballot, and eject the printed paper ballot to let the user inspect that printed ballot. At this point the voter can choose to carry the voter-verified paper ballot to be counted or spoil that ballot and start again. The voter can also feed in a marked up ballot (marked by hand or by computer) and let the computer summarize the votes which that ballot specifies. These features let the blind and/or illiterate vote without losing their privacy by forcing them to find & bring in someone else to mark up their ballot for them. This is as close to computers used in voting as one should want to get.

Sure, but the cost is very relevant when you're doing research. This Blu-Ray disc experiment demonstrates that the theoretical work done previously will probably work as well as the theory predicts.

except Natalie, of Natalie's Cakes N More bakery, is African American.

I notice that a bunch of rich white conservatives though got together to support her:
http://www.gofundme.com/NataliesCakesnMore

The only thing faster than the rioting, is this GoFundMe account, in which she's not only got back the $20,000 needed to rebuild her bakery, but a good year's salary in the bank besides.

by do a lot of damage, I mean completely collapse it. Most nuclear silos though are a hell of a lot deeper than 60 feet, and are built out of reinforced concrete, not packed earth.

I don't need to know so much who's supporting a candidate, because that only matters if I already know that they don't have solid beliefs themselves and are primarily just doing what their supporters want.
 
What politician has solid beliefs?

The AC gave the more authoritative answer, but for a more intuitive one spend some time playing with blocks of jello.

Not for side-to-side movements.

Why would those businesses be targeted if the rioters weren't racist?

Uhh.....

Reminds me of a story my grandfather told me about his experience in the South Pacific. Punchline was "You're a dumb kid, that Japanese guy is a dumb kid, and you both stumbled upon each other. You've got nothing against each other, but because of something people thousands of miles away decided, only one of you was going to walk away that day."

Despite running some masterful election campaigns, he has displayed an amazing ineptitude when it comes to messaging during his reign.

Ahh so he has joined the likes of Trotsky and Che? He'll be in good company, helping Van Jones keep the bench warm.

I suspect your journal will be used as an endorsement for deals.monetize.slashdot.org in the near future.

Being the moderator who could 'bring both sides together' would have been quite a feather in his cap. Rioting and looting within hours (minutes?) of the announcement makes that rather more difficult.

If it took your blood on my hands to defend against your attack, so be it. As the saying goes "better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6".

How does that thinking scale? I'm too lazy to enter into that discussion.