General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsStarlink questions
What is Starlink?
Can it upload and or download data?
Was Starlink being used by the Trump Campaign/Musk/Russia in our elections?
Is the internet story correct that Starlink was being used only in Swing States?
Is this statement correct?
“So now back to Skylink Musk / Trump and stealing an election. They could have manipulated the results without oversight by bypassing the national election network and using Musk's Skylink communications.”
(Posted by usaf-vet thanx to him/her)
Would the NSA - FBI - CIA - military intelligence know about or be able to find out about Starlink’s use
during our elections?
Was Starlink Trump’s “little secret” he was talking about?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
keepthemhonestO
(458 posts)Know the answers but I need answers to all these questions. It's obvious where the momentum was. We need to push the Harris campaign to do something.
gab13by13
(25,400 posts)he is pushing to make sure every ballot is counted in Pa.
Last I checked DOJ has a civil rights division headed by Kristen Clarke, but I have heard nothing from good ole Merrick.
Response to gab13by13 (Reply #4)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
keepthemhonestO
(458 posts)However , I heard nothing from Marc. He's not posting about it and I've been looking.
gab13by13
(25,400 posts)All good questions Botany,
I have another question, since none of the swing states were within the margins for a recount (planned that way?) would a recount of the Pa. Senate race, since it is state wide, show a discrepancy in total vote count? If the total vote count does not add up then for crying out loud someone needs to be knocking on Leon Musk's door.
Response to gab13by13 (Reply #2)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)....is enough of a conflict of interest to spur a recount.
Response to Think. Again. (Reply #11)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
gab13by13
(25,400 posts)to be a part of the election when it has been shown he regularly speaks with Putin?
Who makes these decisions? I heard that Virginia phones the numbers in, why not copy them? Well too late now, every future election will look like this one if we have elections.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)...but that election official seemed very happy to have allowed starlink to handle election related communications.
Autumn
(46,662 posts)Elooney also does drugs openly and manages to keep his security clearance.
Botany
(72,660 posts)And I know my stuff and this election just does not pass my smell test.
Hugin
(34,745 posts)My smell test either. Add that to the immediate reaction to any questions being pounced with vigor.
I will rely upon the fact that numerous people who would know and even courts have said and found, including President Biden, that “Trump cheats.” He’s cheated at golf, on all of his wives, and in hundreds of contractual obligations. How is an election any different? Is he suddenly golden. I don’t buy it.
I guess the quip that Trump fills out his score card before he golfed was soon forgotten.
Farmer-Rick
(11,538 posts)It's good to hear from folks with experience in this.
Botany
(72,660 posts)…. to handle our election data?
Btw my election protection work was a lot more of boots on the ground working at
various polling locations to protect people’s right to vote and have that vote counted
so I am out of my depth here with computers, computer security, the handling of
encrypted data, and satellites.
But I can smell out something that is wrong when the outcome defies logic such
as when we went from mechanical voting machines to electronic voting machines
the exit polls which almost always matched the actual vote stopped doing so and
almost always shifted to the red too.
mopinko
(71,958 posts)they’ll only count casey’s votes. i suspect they only messed w tsf’s votes, and maybe a couple of senators. since this is close, it seems they did little.
i think it’s more that they dumped harris votes. they f’d w registrations & dq’ing mib’s. those ballots will b looked at. throw in forcing ppl to vote provisional, phoned in bomb threats and forced ppl to stand in line and u have a case.
if the senate race shows enough irregularities, we get to recount the whole ballot.
then the rubber meets the road.
i’ll say again, tho- the campaigns have DATA. they need to look at all their +1’s, and check in on any whose votes were not counted.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)For one, there is no “national election network”. Elections are run by counties and overseen by the states. Which means ballots are counted at thousands of locations and then the numbers are passed to the state. Tabulators are airgappped from the Internet so the totals are sent via a different system. There’s no point in changing the numbers in transmission because then the numbers at the counties wouldn’t match.
As to battleground states, in NC we use paper ballots and it is against the law for election equipment to be connected to the Internet.
Response to Abnredleg (Reply #3)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)There is a process to secure voting equipment that involves all parties. We had this discussion in 2020.
Response to Abnredleg (Reply #14)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)Show some proof.
Response to Abnredleg (Reply #20)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
AZSkiffyGeek
(12,663 posts)If you really believe the election was stolen, maybe go to the Capitol and make your voice heard? I believe that's the precedent for when you think your candidate lost and you have no proof whatsoever to back up your conspiracy theories?
FBaggins
(27,802 posts)Is it ok for someone to take a little longer to progress through the stages of grief? Of course.
But it is ok to give the general public the impression that there was nothing unusual about the Maga denials of the 2020 election... that there are deniers in both parties?
No. That's not ok.
Linda ladeewolf
(492 posts)They would just say ask so and so, and point fingers in a circle.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)....hopefully they'll get started on that.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)As part of the certification process.
No one in NC is claiming fraud.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)I did read that mandatory audits are not binding on certification though, so hopefully they won't just do an audit, and not bother to look at the results of it.
https://verifiedvoting.org/publication/recounts-audits-2024-verified-voting/
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)Of course they won’t ignore problems, given that the Secretary of State in NV is a Dem.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)...to assuring the election was secure?
Don't you think ANY SOS should strive for that?
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)You’re pushing a conspiracy, which means you need conspirators at a high level. I’m just pointing out how unlikely that is.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)...have any merit to them.
I believe that's legitimate considering the stakes.
I'm also beginning to wonder why any Dem would be opposed to verifying the results in any election.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)If all the campaigns aren't crying fraud, it is because the final numbers didn't surprise them. The outcome wasn't a surprise to campaign professionals.
travelingthrulife
(943 posts)How could you possibly think an election result of these known election manipulators would be on the up and up??
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)and so many people of both parities involved, that large scale fraud is difficult. You can't hang your hat on "it might have happened" - you need to point to major anomalies in the vote if you want to claim fraud. However, the campaigns are not raising the issue of fraud because the outcome matches what the polling was showing. Unless you want to bring the pollsters into the conspiracy.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)2naSalit
(93,444 posts)Official who was pointing out some serious irregularities in NC so there's that. Wouldn't call that a nobody.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)Farmer-Rick
(11,538 posts)With totals here in TN. It happens regularly. I don't know why.
But this state is so red they really don't care. Just so long as a red Magat is voted in. You can bet your bippy they would carefully look into it if a Dem won the state.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)...would let us know if a recount is in order.
No matter how close or not the races were, if the results appear to be different from what an audit finds, a recount needs to be done.
It's just numbers, we know how to make sure numbers are correctly counted.
Response to Think. Again. (Reply #8)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)It’s part of the certification process.
Sympthsical
(10,397 posts)Many times.
"Just asking questions!" looks perilously close to "Just ignoring answers!" in a lot of this.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)...in most states they non-binding.
Hopefully they will actually consider what any audit results show.
https://verifiedvoting.org/publication/recounts-audits-2024-verified-voting/
yourout
(8,132 posts)The number of ballots.
Also need to check the absentee ballot request count versus the actual number of returned absentee ballots
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)Sympthsical
(10,397 posts)The Starlink stuff got going with an offhand comment by an election official in Tulare County in California.
Why would Gov. Newsom - you know, the most prominent Democratic politician leading a blue state counter to Trump - sit on his hands about all this?
Why would Democratic officials, secretaries of state, governors, and election board members?
For this grand conspiracy to work, you'd need a lot of Democrats to be complicit.
And why is it only the Internets can see this vast conspiracy while all these career civil servants, Democratic figures, and election engineers cannot?
I'd like to say at some point common sense must reign. But this is the Internet, baby. We can drag this one out forever.
I didn't have "What if we just went full QAnon?" on my bingo card of election results, but lord is this demoralizing to watch.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)It's only been a couple of days since an election official admitted using starlink.
Sympthsical
(10,397 posts)Because it is the logical consequence of the accusation.
For what is claimed to be true and/or possible, Democratic politicians would have to be involved or knowledgeable in some way.
Just because people are being careful not to say it overtly - because this space forbids bashing our own politicians - doesn't mean the accusations aren't implicit and part and parcel to the events that would have to be true to make their conspiracies valid.
I don't think Democratic politicians would go along with a vast conspiracy to help Trump, and I wish people would join me in that by understanding what they're implying with their "questions" that are in truth thinly-veiled claims without factual basis.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)Sympthsical
(10,397 posts)A lot more.
Here's a thought. Instead of "Just asking questions!" why don't people try "Just finding answers!"
Because somehow I can do it really quickly and well with google, but that method seems elusive in some widespread way.
Unless ensuring facts are elusive is behavior by design. But I wouldn't know anything about that.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)And Yes, answers are exactly what people are looking for, answers as to whether the first counts match the audits, or perhaps the recounts.
gab13by13
(25,400 posts)There was a former military poster who did a post yesterday and explained how the election could have been easily hacked.
Sympthsical
(10,397 posts)Very, very.
Especially since just this weekend information was given about these "questions" about audits and it seems like it was ignored entirely. I know, because that information was right there in our PA election exchange.
It's on the secretary of state's website.
So people can't manage to read a state's election rules and processes, but they can consume tons of unverified claims, speculation, and "this could have happened, possibly, maybe" on social media and spread it.
When the actual Secretary of State information never makes it through the bubble because social media speculation is just too confirming of what one wants to believe, yeah, I'm going to call that out. That is bad thinking. It is bad logic.
And it's a look that damages us, because we look kooky.
Here it is. Again.
2% statistical recount. Required by state law, the 2% statistical recount occurs in each county. During this audit, county boards of elections pull a random sample of either 2% of all ballots cast in all races OR a random sample of 2,000 ballots, whichever number is fewer.
Statewide risk-limiting audit (RLA). RLAs are are scientifically designed procedures that use statistical methods to confirm election outcomes. RLAs examine a random sample of paper ballots, comparing the votes on paper to the totals reported by the vote-counting machines to ensure that the reported outcome of the contest being audited is correct. These types of audits can confirm that voting systems tabulated the paper ballots accurately enough that a full hand count would produce the same outcome.
After three years of performing RLA pilots, the Department of State in September 2022 directed all Pennsylvania counties to participate in a statewide RLA for every primary and general election beginning with the Nov. 8, 2022, general election.
Each county's certified voting system provides a voter-verifiable paper record of each vote cast, meets the latest standards of security and accessibility, and can be thoroughly audited.
Every voting system and paper ballot in Pennsylvania must include plain text that voters can read to verify their choices before casting their ballot, and every system has successfully completed penetration testing, access-control testing and testing to ensure that every access point, software and firmware are protected from tampering. Many other important recommendations by national security and cybersecurity experts are in place in Pennsylvania, including mandatory pre-election testing of all voting equipment.
gab13by13
(25,400 posts)or is that a QAnon conspiracy theory?
The person who routed the information from Ohio to a warehouse in Tennessee admitted it but sadly he died in a small plane crash before he could testify.
Sympthsical
(10,397 posts)Horses to water.
You literally just ignored the facts that were laid out for you - from the Democratic Secretary of State - and veered into another direction entirely.
This isn't "Just asking questions!" This is doing everything in one's power to avoid engaging with facts.
Not the route I choose for myself, but people make their choices.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)Nothing has been certified yet.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)...that audits have already answered the questions.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)None of the election officials have expressed any concern about fraud so I highly doubt any serious issues will surface during the audits. And if they do, then the election won’t be certified. Why don’t we just let the process play out?
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)Correct, that is what audits and recounts are for, to reveal any issues.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)Why didn’t you wait until the audits are done before spreading fraud conspiracies?
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)...and most states do not even consider any audits to be binding on the results certification, in fact in only one of the 7 swing states will the audits be binding, all other states could simply not mention any non-matching audit results and just certify the erroneous first-count results, unless the public is aware and pushing for the discrepancies to be addressed through recounts.
(Edit to add link: https://verifiedvoting.org/publication/recounts-audits-2024-verified-voting/ )
Yes, that would mean officials are "conspiring" to cheat, just like they did with false electors in 2020.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)There is no way certification would proceed in the face of proof of fraud. That is a political and judicial impossibility. And let’s not forget we are talking about Democrats running the audits. Are you seriously suggesting they are committing criminal activity?
You have an erroneous understanding of how the process works. Your entire argument is built on a foundation of sand.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)...is how vehemently some Dems are arguing against common-sense calls for verification of the surprising election results, especially in the face of possible starlink collusion.
Very curious...
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)You’re creating straw man arguments to push a conspiracy theory.
I never was able to reason with MAGA election deniers so there is no point in arguing with Democrat election deniers.
Good luck with the windmill tilting.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)And the starlink claim by the election official stands as it has since she made it, no investigation has debunked anything about it.
But of course, let's just ignore the man behind the curtain, nothing to see here.
muriel_volestrangler
(102,693 posts)That "s" on the end of "https" indicates the data from a website to your browser was encrypted, and if anyone like the communications carrier had tried to alter it, your browser would know (and anyone trying to alter it would need the encryption key too). Assuming that the election results were transmitted with this basic level of security that 99% of the internet now uses, then someone would have needed to hack one end of the communication, not the carrier. And that kind of hacking is no easier for someone in Starlink than for anyone else.
"Is the internet story correct that Starlink was being used only in Swing States?"
Was that meant to mitigate things? Because the swing to Trump was less in swing states than in non-competitive ones. But "the internet story" is almost always wrong. Haven't we learned that yet? You need a named, knowledgeable source, not "the internet".
gab13by13
(25,400 posts)who routed the information from Ohio to a warehouse in Tennessee. He was a very reliable witness who actually did the hacking,
Sadly he died in a small plane crash before he could testify. people who come out of the shadows to whistleblow don't live that long it seems.
That's one example of Republicans stealing an election.
Jeb Bush and the Supreme Court stole the 2000 election, that's 2 examples of how Republicans stole elections and I doubt they have stopped doing it.
muriel_volestrangler
(102,693 posts)As you saying he was an employee of a communications carrier who used his position with them to do "something to do with a warehouse"? I'm amazed you know he was "a very reliable witness" when he died before he could testify. But you may as well explain how a warehouse in Tennessee means "a stolen election".
Or are you saying "yes, it's Republicans people need to watch out for, not Starlink employees".
annielion
(25 posts)I agree with you about what happened in 2000 and 2004. I know exit polls in our country are a joke. I totally believe this election was stolen, but I'm not a computer person. Do you know how it could have been stolen?
Amishman
(5,832 posts)There is no magic that can be done by technology that won't quickly be caught by the people and checks involved in our process.
Our system as it exists today has excellent air gaps and audit trails, and countless engaged well-meaning volunteers involved in the process.
Precinct level volunteers know how many voters they had and what their totals were, and those I know are always very concerned that their work was recorded and counted accurately. Above and beyond the many double checks built into the system, those volunteers often do check their precinct's official total once the numbers are out and official.
As already mentioned tabulators are air gapped and not directly connected to the internet. The certification process involves manual double checking randomly selected samples.
Tampering in transmission (such as the starlink claim), or any point down-stream would be exposed quickly. Any flipped votes would be attributed to a precinct, and quickly noticed. Same for fabricated votes, with the added problem that fabricated votes would also quickly become unbelievable when compared to registered voters in the precinct and caught red handed when checked against turnout books.
My off the cuff guess is tampering is limited to a couple hundred votes per precinct before someone notices, and would still require the entire staff at the precinct to be in on it. To get a meaningful amount of fraud, you'd need an army of people working in thousands of precincts - a scale that makes keeping the secret, or just pulling it off, essentially impossible.
Because voter registration, turnout, and vote totals are reported publicly down to such a granular level, it is extremely easy to validate the integrity of the whole.
Ontheboundry
(302 posts)And yet it continues to show up
Starlink did not tabulate votes,.as those machines are not connected to the internet some states use paper ballots still. My state gives an actual receipt
Starlink was used to upload it to the sec of state (or whomever it goes to). .there is a record of what the totals were before uploading, so it's not terribly hard to compare totals .
Response to Ontheboundry (Reply #37)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Ontheboundry
(302 posts)Five of the 7 swing states have Democrats in power, I would think they would have this sniffed out fairly quick, no?
Response to Ontheboundry (Reply #41)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Ontheboundry
(302 posts)I only started posting recently. I was definitely here long before the election
Response to Ontheboundry (Reply #42)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Ontheboundry
(302 posts)You are reaching for sunbeams
I have literally seen a dozen IT experts here on DU explain that star link can't do that
Should we ignore them also?
Response to Ontheboundry (Reply #54)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Lancero
(3,109 posts)Ontheboundry
(302 posts)But upon hearing this I began sniffing around, and saw a lot of IT guys right here explaining how that isn't possible.
Positive is how do we move on and improve on this. Holding out hope for the house, but that's not looking good. Maybe some of Trump's appointments open up spots we can take
This is a hot mess and everyone is on edge, but that's when you take a deep breath, roll up your sleeves and figure out how to fix it, not cry about what happened cuz it hardly changes anything
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)Response to Think. Again. (Reply #52)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)so what more are you asking them to do? That's allowed by law, that is.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)A lot of votes are still being first-counted.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)I don’t understand your point.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)...my post pointed out that some of the audits can not yet be being done because the first vote count isn't completed yet.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)I'm not seeing the issue
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)Advancing vague fraud theories without proof is going to generate pushback. You need to present facts if you expect us to man the barricades.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)....now election officials are claiming musk's company handled "communications" during the election.
I am pushing for checks and double-checks on the election results to verify the unexpected, surprising results are true and not the outcome of cheating by trump, a known cheater.
I think "pushback" by other Dems on that an odd reaction.
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)Trump’s victory was within the margin of error of the polling averages. And Starlink was used by some governments to connect polling sites to state voter registration systems for same day registration, not to connect voting machines to the Internet as some have implied. As to audits, it has been pointed out to you many times that checks and audits are done as part of the certificate process.
You’re tilting at windmills - those who are intimately involved in the campaign aren’t complaining and they’re the ones with the data.
Think. Again.
(19,049 posts)It's only been 2 days since the starlink connection was uncovered, if you're expecting Harris' team to immediately run around screaming at the media, you're probably thinking of how the rightwingers would react.
Let's see how the audits (which have not begun yet) turn out, shall we?
Abnredleg
(1,002 posts)Trump will inaugurated in two months.
ancianita
(38,871 posts)Last edited Tue Nov 12, 2024, 11:17 AM - Edit history (3)
here's what I've come up with.
Obviously, how it works is classified under military contracts. That's something the president and Elon have access to, probably that other countries don't unless they illegally pay Elon, the Privatizer.
Which is why, in the interests of national security (and I think we are in a national security emergency),
I think this sitting president/commander-in-chief should nationalize Starlink and sanction Elon for selling its use to declared hostile foreign powers.
Google AI says:
Download speeds: Typically between 25 and 220 Mbps, with most users experiencing speeds over 100 Mbps
Upload speeds: Typically between 5 and 20 Mbps
Starlink is a satellite internet service that's designed for rural areas without other high-speed internet options.
Palo Alto Networks says:
https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/starlink-failover-fast-download-almost-no-upload-speed/td-p/591283
When I connect to the Starlink router directly, I get download speeds of 50bmps so I know it's not the ISP's fault.
A troubleshooting ping test from the PA NGF web GUI, yields 50-60 percent ping failure.
My oldest son in Australia works for these guys.
It's a rumor but not publicly confirmed; it might/might not be under investigation. Whether or if it's used is is likely public, but how it works likely is classified.
Is this statement correct?
“So now back to Skylink Musk / Trump and stealing an election. They could have manipulated the results without oversight by bypassing the national election network and using Musk's Skylink communications.”
(Posted by usaf-vet thanx to him/her)
We don't know yet. And the name is incorrect -- it's Starlink, not Skylink.
Read the wikipedia entry to see who Starlink contracts with and who would likely know or be able to find out. It's possible that the NSA knows everything about what happened; that the FBI, only if ordered will investigate what it can find on the ground; that the CIA military intelligence are looking into its use during the election. All of these agencies can send findings to the sitting president.
Can we know about or be able to find out about Starlink’s use during our elections? Only if Biden wants us to.
As for the trump/johnson "little secret," that will only matter if an investigation reveals a conspiracy to use Starlink to overturn the popular vote numbers. Could they be tried under military jurisdiction? Maybe, I don't know.
Thanks for asking. This is the best I've come up with...
Botany
(72,660 posts)Back to post # 22. Why was Elon Musk a man who has been in multiple contacts with
a man who is hostile to America, Vlad Putin allowed to handle U.S. election data?
ancianita
(38,871 posts)nation on Earth with that goal. He lied his way into US citizenship to obtain business power and money in the US. Putin and other racist/misogynist authoritarians like guys like Elon who not only know engineering, but want to engineer society to their own enrichment.
Now they are all in the White House, thanks to power/wealth worshippers on the Republican side, and their groomed voters who voted for them on the Republican side.
LeftInTX
(30,594 posts)If you purchase internet access while flying, it will be satellite based. I don't know if the airlines contract with Starlink or someone else.
Satellite internet has been around for a long time. However, in the US, almost everyone uses a form of cable. Satellite internet hasn't caught on.
Satellite TV is still a thing, but it us not reliable in bad weather.
Satellite phones have been around since the 70s.
ancianita
(38,871 posts)https://www.noaa.gov/submarine-cables#:~:text=It%20is%20a%20common%20misconception,that%20crisscross%20the%20world's%20seafloors.
So only 5% of our Internet is used via satellite.
What this means is that when we lose NOAA to privatized internet services... sure we pay Internet carriers like Spectrum (CA) right now, but -- when we lose NOAA as a government agency, we will pay whoever the trump administration turns over the undersea communications to. And then it's likely that the oligarchs who will run government for trump will be the profiteers of our Internet use.
Privatizing the country is what Putin has done in Russia, and what trump's oligarchs will do in the U.S. through the Heritage-Federalist-crytpotechbro Triumvirate.
Goodbye, rule of law and The People and the U.S. Constitution, and hello, rule of men through an oligarchic triumvirate.
LeftInTX
(30,594 posts)Kinda hard to have cables running off of planes!
Once you get too far from cell towers, you lose signals. So if you want internet, you purchase Wifi from the airline. (Some airlines and flights have free WiFi)
ancianita
(38,871 posts)You seem pretty non-credible, given what I know and have linked about Internet services.
So why not help a fellow Democrat out -- and DU readers, for that matter -- and link your sources. Okay?
Besides that, you've apparently missed my main point about privatizing government.
LeftInTX
(30,594 posts)When you are passenger on a plane and you want internet, it is provided via satellite.
Why am I being non-helpful? And non-credible? Hughes Aircraft contracted for a satellite ISP in 1993. Satellite internet has limited use and the quality is not aa good as cable because it is weather dependent.
And since this is a thread about an election recount, I don't have the time and ability to go over all the negative aspects of privatization.
Our local government uses spectrum internet as an ISP.
ancianita
(38,871 posts)What we Democrats are concerned about -- or at least I AM, and even our commander-in-chief should be, too, imo -- is how Elon will use satellite downloads of data -- and AI as part of that -- to run this country's government and military decisions that IMPACT national security and endanger Americans' freedoms in order to enrich the oligarchs) (including Putin's network) that have PWN3D the White House.
If you don't see an oligarchic coup going on here, and the Internet comms privatization that will happen, is 95% unhelpful. So I don't know what to say other than that.
LeftInTX
(30,594 posts)Don't even have a computer right now. Why are you picking on me? Why us it my responsibility to think of a cohesive response when I don't even have a computer. Silence is not disagreement. It's because I have limited resources. I worked my butt off in this election and have not physically recovered. I actually physically work to elect candidates. I don't even watch TV because I don't have the time.
As a matter of fact, I need to be talking with the computer repair shop etc.
Progressive dog
(7,298 posts)like a cell system. If anyone can figure out how to use cell phones or cell towers to change votes without getting caught then Starlink could probably be used too.
Voting machines are not connected to cell systems or the internet. Physical access is required to alter voting machine software.
Anyway, the near tie in the national polls tells us that there was no fix. Trump won the swing states.
Response to Progressive dog (Reply #75)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Progressive dog
(7,298 posts)So do you think that there are secret satellites up there that can change computer data and even alter the paperwork at the voting sites and no one will notice or bother to check?
Response to Progressive dog (Reply #83)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Progressive dog
(7,298 posts)Response to Progressive dog (Reply #87)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Progressive dog
(7,298 posts)perhaps you should look for a fact or two tp support them.
Martin68
(24,726 posts)the server that you use to interact with DU. Its greatest promise is that it provides internet service to rural communities all over the world. I am not aware of any way that such a network could be used to hack local elections in any way that other networks could be used. As has been repeatedly pointed out above and in other posts, voting machines and tabulators are not connected to the internet for the very security reasons the starlink theorists worry about. I have yet to hear a credible theory regarding how starlink could have been used to changed vote tallies.
LiberalArkie
(16,656 posts)misanthrope
(8,295 posts)It is Eloon's way of marking the heavenly firmament with his urine.
SoCalDavidS
(10,599 posts)If those in our party are unwilling to take the basic steps needed to give assurance that there was nothing fishy during the counting, then I'm not donating EVER again. I am not a huge donor, so it really won't matter to them.
I may continue voting, but I'll be under No illusion as to whether my vote, or anybody else's vote, matters.
LetMyPeopleVote
(155,514 posts)I have been active in voter protection since 2004. I have been an election judge on several occasions and have been a poll watcher for the central counting tabulation room. The voter check in systems are hooked to the internet to check voter registrations and to code the paper ballots as to what elections are to be voted on by that voter. The machines where the voter make their selections and mark the paper ballots and the machines that tabulate these votes are not connected to the internet. As an election judge, we had to put up all of the machines other than the machine that tabulates the vote. Those machines were hand transported to either a designated drop off place or to the central election office where the machines were given to the machines that further complied the vote. There was a paper trail when we drop off the machines at either location.
I agree with these election experts
Link to tweet
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-election-starlink-musk-steal-trump-38757341656d4f44243076d6356cb68b
CLAIM: Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk used his internet provider Starlink to steal the 2024 election for President-elect Donald Trump.
THE FACTS: These claims are unfounded. Election officials, including from multiple swing states, told The Associated Press that their voting equipment doesn’t use Starlink and is not even connected to the internet. States have additional security measures to ensure that the count is accurate, according to experts. Election officials and security agencies have reported no significant issues with the 2024 race.
“It is not possible that Starlink was used to hack or change the outcome of the US presidential election,” David Becker, founder and executive director of The Center for Election Innovation and Research, wrote in an email. “This, quite simply, did not happen, and could not happen, thanks to the security measures we have in place, and these conspiracy theories echo other disinformation we’ve heard over the past several years.”
Becker further explained that the country’s nearly 10,000 election jurisdictions use a wide range of voting machines that are not connected to the internet while voting occurs and that nearly all votes are recorded on paper ballots, which are audited by hand to confirm the results of electronic tabulators.
“If anyone tried to interfere with the machines to rig the election, it would be discovered through multiple means, including reconciling the registered voters who cast ballots with the number of votes, as well as the audits,” he added.