Archive for September, 2004

Montaner has the right idea for Carter and the OAS

September 21, 2004

Carlos Alberto Montaner has the right idea about what would be the proper road to follow if the Carter Center and the OAS wanted to find out the truth:


“How can this operation be carried out? Simply by naming a panel of impartial experts — mathematicians, statisticians, systems engineers, lawyers even — to listen to the accusations of the opposition and the arguments of the government. How can this operation be carried out? Simply by naming a panel of impartial experts — mathematicians, statisticians, systems engineers, lawyers even — to listen to the accusations of the opposition and the arguments of the government.”

Top five probable reasons why Chavez cancelled his trip

September 20, 2004

So, Hugo Chavez cancelled his trip to New York to the summit on poverty, because “the starting motor on the left engine was not working properly”(1). Wow, a powerful President like Chavez can be stopped by a little starting motor, despite having an old plane that served him well for the first four years of his Presidency and multiple Citations and the like that jet around the new oligarchs of the robolucion.


See, the President had more than the U.N. meeting, he was going to meet with Wall Street types, was going to speak at the Council of the Americas and was going to inaugurate the new offices of Citgo in Houston. But this makes it such a source of rumors and stories that it is certainly fun to hear the many theories:


 


-(2)Chavez was mad because Bush did not invite him to lunch


-(3)The US Secret service would not allow him to go and speak at an Evangelical church in Harlem.


-(4)The OAS had refused to have accept his “surprise” visit to its Washington headquarters.


-(5)The border incident has him concerned as six more people have been killed since Friday, while the Colombia Army continues to point to the Colombian guerrilla as the killers.


 


As usual, we will never know the true reason. What else is new?

Smartmatic Seminar in Miami

September 20, 2004

When I saw this invitation to this seminar by Smartmatic at the South Florida Tech organization on September 30th., many things went through my head, but speechless may be the best way to describe me, particularly the part about the “recent success in Venezuela”. I hope all of you in Miami can attend and give us* a blow by blow account (bold lettering by the blogger):


MEETING THE CHALLENGES OF ELECTRONIC VOTING


 


Summary


 


A Presentation by Antonio Mugica, CEO, Smartmatic, Boca Raton

One of the companies hard at work to make large-scale electronic voting tamper-proof, verifiable and affordable is Boca Raton-based Smartmatic. Having designed the technological infrastructure deployed nationwide in the recent Venezuelan presidential referendum, Smartmatic has been chosen as the special guest presenter at the South Florida Technology Alliance September 30 meeting at the Davie Campus of Nova Southeastern University.


 


Details


 


Antonio Mugica, CEO, Smartmatic Corp., will examine the many challenges faced by developers seeking to improve electoral processes with digital technology and provide a close-up look at Smartmatic’s Automated Electoral Solution (SAES). He will discuss Smartmatic’s business strategies and recent success in Venezuela. Mr. Mugica holds an Electrical Engineering degree from Simon Bolivar University. He created Smartmatic’s vision and holds over nine pending patents under his name in the U.S. 


 


*Devil’s Excrement will give a free one year subscription to this blog to the first report from the seminar and will post the first written description at no charge!

The hypothesis of the hacker by Ibsen Martinez

September 20, 2004

Funny article by Ibsen Martínez in today’s El Nacional, had to translate given its relevance to what I have been discussing in this blog and the fact that one has to keep a sense of humor above all.


The hypothesis of the hacker (And other fantastic tales) by Ibsen Martinez


 


I have heard no less than six versions about the hypothesis of the hacker:


 


The canonical version of the same supposes that at some point the Chavista high command hired the services of a Russian hacker to twist the results of the recall referendum- A Russian hacker… suggestive idea, without any doubt.


 


-Why Russian? I asked close up to the last “analyst” that told the story in my presence.


-What are you saying?


-Why is the hacker in your version Russian? I ask, because I have also heard he is German.


-The hacker Diosdado hired is Russian. For a reason I ignore, Russia produces the sharpest hackers in the world. Everybody knows that. The hacker that twisted the results was Russian.


-The surprising thing is that other people say he is German.


-They are not well informed; they say something just to say it: Diosdado’s hacker is Russian.


-At another bar I heard say he was Cuban. And that it was Silvio Rodriguez who brought him hidden among his musicians.


-A Cuban hacker? Absurd! It’s amazing to see what irresponsible people invent. Cuba is not well known for its hackers: prostitutes, bongo players, home run hitters, water polo trainers, all of that, maybe, but hackers in Cuba? I am telling you: The hacker is Russian.


-Accepted: He is Russian. Now tell me how they hired him.


-They have all of the money. With that money you hire anything you want. Why are you so surprised? PDVSA has the bills to hire the hacker who intervened the bidirectionality of the Smartmatic Plus boxes. That’s all, it is that simple: that’s how they screwed us.


-Sorry, but I like fluff; if you are going to bullshit me, I have the right to request that the bullshit be reasonably elaborated. If there is something that can give some semblance of veracity to bullshit, is the details. I would like the details of when, where and by whom was the Russian hacker hired. It would please my credulity to know at least what was the Russian’s hacker name, Vassily? Dimitri? Evguenny? Yuri? And since we are talking about it, why couldn’t it be a Russian woman? It would not be peculiar to have a female hacker in a market for hackers as effervescent as the Russian one: Nadehsda? Tatiana? Svetlana?


-Are you calling me a bulshitter?


-No; I am simply asking that you tell me the name of the hacker


-Nobody calls me a bulshitter


-Don’t sweat, “broder”, I am not calling you a bulshitter. In reality the hypothesis of a hacker…


-It is not a “hypothesis”. I am not a man of “hypothesis”. I am telling you what happened; the midnight of August 15th. the Russian hacker stuck it to us up to the point where it says the brand name.


-Ok, don’t get all pissed off. In reality, the intervention of a Russian hacker as part of the technological fraud in a Latinoamerican referendum is simply fascinating. It is something that deserves an article in Slate or in Gatopardo. But understand that I would get high much easier if you give me more details. For example, where did they go get the Russian hacker? To Russia?


-Don’t’ be infantile: The hacker is Russian, but that does not mean he lives in Russia. A hacker can live anywhere he wants; his work transcends geography because he lives in hyperspace. The hacker is Russian…


-Let’s call him Vladimir.


-OK, let’s say his name is Vladimir. Shit on your pants: Vladimir lives in California. In Silicon Valley to be more precise.


Silicon Valley! That makes sense.


-Of course it makes sense! Diosdado got in touch with him long time ago, chatting on the Web. They are old friends. Virtual friends. It seems Vladimir was also a communications engineer in Vladivostok, before the fall of the Berlin wall, a long time before he emigrated to the US. That’s where the elective affinity between Diosdado and Vladimir comes from. Both were one day communications engineers.


-Who would have imagined it! Diosdado Cabello having on line friendships!


-Well, let me tell you that one of the characteristics of post modernity is the return to epistolary literature, via Internet. The lost art of writing to friends, and in general to dear ones, has returned in the XXIst century to stay. There are virtual romances, people that find their mate and get married via the Web. People that get Viagra on the Web, that find spare parts for their 66 Valliant on the Web. Why couldn’t Diosdado Cabello find a friend via the Web? Somebody he has never seen, but with whom he established, in time, a close friendship, a stimulating and sustained link of the purely intellectual type. Diosdado maybe Chavista, but even Chavistas have friends.


-No, I am not saying anything against it. That part of your tale is very consistent. Let’s recapitulate: Diosdado has a Russian friend whose name is Vladimir, a friend from the Web and he tells him that he is worried because everything indicated that the No was going to lose the recall.


-Exactly, that is how the shit came down: Diosdado, very concerned because the polls yielded a victorious Si, arrived home one night, served himself a scotch, connected to the Web and began chatting with Vladimir, his virtual buddy from Silicon Valley: And, Vladimir asked him about the voting machines, asked him if there is no way to fiddle with the software and Diosdado, disconsolate, says no, that unfortunately for him, the Smartmatic Plus ™ boxes are tamper proof. And he is not saying it: It is certified by Quiros Corradi and Maria Corina Machado; two factors characterized as the enemy. “The REP is fine” says Maria Corina in a press conference; “The machines can be trusted” says Quiros Corradi in a press conference. Nothing can be done, Diosdado chats, and we have to resign ourselves to a loss.


-Piece of shit, no?


-Imagine


-So?


-Vladimir chats with Diosdado: ”Don’t sweat it Diosdadovitch: find me the diagram of those machines-the so called blueprint- and you ill see how we are going to find a way around the referendum. Turns out Diosdado and Vladimir had been friends for years, but he did not know that Vladimir was a three drum hacker until that night. Imagine!


-Shit, wait, let’s order another one, this story is great.


-So the shit is that Vladimir who is a Ukrainian wizard “breaks the code” of the Smartmatic Plus ™.


-Just like the British counterspies deciphered the Enigma machines in the Second Wold War


-Exactly. And with only twenty four hours to go for the referendum. Things were tougher than anyone imagines. The guy rode the bidirectionality, alone, with a Vodka Tonic by his side, from Silicon Valley, in permanent communication with Diosdado, he began modelling the results with vote intentions and this and that. Who cares about Hausmann’s algorithm? It was a Russian hacker that screwed us!


-Incredible. It gives you a lot to think about. The perfect crime. No evidence, no smoking gun.


-That Russian already collected and you are going to find him the day when Hell freezes over. That’s why I am not going to vote in the regional elections. What for? So that Vladimir can laugh at me? No way! I wasn’t born yesterday.


-I have another version, equally believable, I think.


-Let’s see.


-The Chavismo decided from day one to place obstacles in the recall vote. Thus, all of the irregularities to take advantage of them, which Tulio Alvarez has summarized superbly. But on the way, something made them think that that they could win the same recall vote they opposed so much. Both strategies are not incompatible. That’s why they displayed with no morals all of the abilities of the old electoral populist culture: they took care of both, of blocking the referendum and bringing the people out to vote. They had the motivation and the resources. They are militant and they ambition hegemony. More than looking at an algorithm that explains the recall referendum, if I were an opposition politician I would try to stare in the face at a formidable enemy: A radical populism with dozens of billions of US dollars.


-No way man, you are starting to talk like Teodoro. If you are going to start with those laborious cogitations then it is true that we can no longer talk…

The hypothesis of the hacker by Ibsen Martinez

September 20, 2004

Funny article by Ibsen Martínez in today’s El Nacional, had to translate given its relevance to what I have been discussing in this blog and the fact that one has to keep a sense of humor above all.


The hypothesis of the hacker (And other fantastic tales) by Ibsen Martinez


 


I have heard no less than six versions about the hypothesis of the hacker:


 


The canonical version of the same supposes that at some point the Chavista high command hired the services of a Russian hacker to twist the results of the recall referendum- A Russian hacker… suggestive idea, without any doubt.


 


-Why Russian? I asked close up to the last “analyst” that told the story in my presence.


-What are you saying?


-Why is the hacker in your version Russian? I ask, because I have also heard he is German.


-The hacker Diosdado hired is Russian. For a reason I ignore, Russia produces the sharpest hackers in the world. Everybody knows that. The hacker that twisted the results was Russian.


-The surprising thing is that other people say he is German.


-They are not well informed; they say something just to say it: Diosdado’s hacker is Russian.


-At another bar I heard say he was Cuban. And that it was Silvio Rodriguez who brought him hidden among his musicians.


-A Cuban hacker? Absurd! It’s amazing to see what irresponsible people invent. Cuba is not well known for its hackers: prostitutes, bongo players, home run hitters, water polo trainers, all of that, maybe, but hackers in Cuba? I am telling you: The hacker is Russian.


-Accepted: He is Russian. Now tell me how they hired him.


-They have all of the money. With that money you hire anything you want. Why are you so surprised? PDVSA has the bills to hire the hacker who intervened the bidirectionality of the Smartmatic Plus boxes. That’s all, it is that simple: that’s how they screwed us.


-Sorry, but I like fluff; if you are going to bullshit me, I have the right to request that the bullshit be reasonably elaborated. If there is something that can give some semblance of veracity to bullshit, is the details. I would like the details of when, where and by whom was the Russian hacker hired. It would please my credulity to know at least what was the Russian’s hacker name, Vassily? Dimitri? Evguenny? Yuri? And since we are talking about it, why couldn’t it be a Russian woman? It would not be peculiar to have a female hacker in a market for hackers as effervescent as the Russian one: Nadehsda? Tatiana? Svetlana?


-Are you calling me a bulshitter?


-No; I am simply asking that you tell me the name of the hacker


-Nobody calls me a bulshitter


-Don’t sweat, “broder”, I am not calling you a bulshitter. In reality the hypothesis of a hacker…


-It is not a “hypothesis”. I am not a man of “hypothesis”. I am telling you what happened; the midnight of August 15th. the Russian hacker stuck it to us up to the point where it says the brand name.


-Ok, don’t get all pissed off. In reality, the intervention of a Russian hacker as part of the technological fraud in a Latinoamerican referendum is simply fascinating. It is something that deserves an article in Slate or in Gatopardo. But understand that I would get high much easier if you give me more details. For example, where did they go get the Russian hacker? To Russia?


-Don’t’ be infantile: The hacker is Russian, but that does not mean he lives in Russia. A hacker can live anywhere he wants; his work transcends geography because he lives in hyperspace. The hacker is Russian…


-Let’s call him Vladimir.


-OK, let’s say his name is Vladimir. Shit on your pants: Vladimir lives in California. In Silicon Valley to be more precise.


Silicon Valley! That makes sense.


-Of course it makes sense! Diosdado got in touch with him long time ago, chatting on the Web. They are old friends. Virtual friends. It seems Vladimir was also a communications engineer in Vladivostok, before the fall of the Berlin wall, a long time before he emigrated to the US. That’s where the elective affinity between Diosdado and Vladimir comes from. Both were one day communications engineers.


-Who would have imagined it! Diosdado Cabello having on line friendships!


-Well, let me tell you that one of the characteristics of post modernity is the return to epistolary literature, via Internet. The lost art of writing to friends, and in general to dear ones, has returned in the XXIst century to stay. There are virtual romances, people that find their mate and get married via the Web. People that get Viagra on the Web, that find spare parts for their 66 Valliant on the Web. Why couldn’t Diosdado Cabello find a friend via the Web? Somebody he has never seen, but with whom he established, in time, a close friendship, a stimulating and sustained link of the purely intellectual type. Diosdado maybe Chavista, but even Chavistas have friends.


-No, I am not saying anything against it. That part of your tale is very consistent. Let’s recapitulate: Diosdado has a Russian friend whose name is Vladimir, a friend from the Web and he tells him that he is worried because everything indicated that the No was going to lose the recall.


-Exactly, that is how the shit came down: Diosdado, very concerned because the polls yielded a victorious Si, arrived home one night, served himself a scotch, connected to the Web and began chatting with Vladimir, his virtual buddy from Silicon Valley: And, Vladimir asked him about the voting machines, asked him if there is no way to fiddle with the software and Diosdado, disconsolate, says no, that unfortunately for him, the Smartmatic Plus ™ boxes are tamper proof. And he is not saying it: It is certified by Quiros Corradi and Maria Corina Machado; two factors characterized as the enemy. “The REP is fine” says Maria Corina in a press conference; “The machines can be trusted” says Quiros Corradi in a press conference. Nothing can be done, Diosdado chats, and we have to resign ourselves to a loss.


-Piece of shit, no?


-Imagine


-So?


-Vladimir chats with Diosdado: ”Don’t sweat it Diosdadovitch: find me the diagram of those machines-the so called blueprint- and you ill see how we are going to find a way around the referendum. Turns out Diosdado and Vladimir had been friends for years, but he did not know that Vladimir was a three drum hacker until that night. Imagine!


-Shit, wait, let’s order another one, this story is great.


-So the shit is that Vladimir who is a Ukrainian wizard “breaks the code” of the Smartmatic Plus ™.


-Just like the British counterspies deciphered the Enigma machines in the Second Wold War


-Exactly. And with only twenty four hours to go for the referendum. Things were tougher than anyone imagines. The guy rode the bidirectionality, alone, with a Vodka Tonic by his side, from Silicon Valley, in permanent communication with Diosdado, he began modelling the results with vote intentions and this and that. Who cares about Hausmann’s algorithm? It was a Russian hacker that screwed us!


-Incredible. It gives you a lot to think about. The perfect crime. No evidence, no smoking gun.


-That Russian already collected and you are going to find him the day when Hell freezes over. That’s why I am not going to vote in the regional elections. What for? So that Vladimir can laugh at me? No way! I wasn’t born yesterday.


-I have another version, equally believable, I think.


-Let’s see.


-The Chavismo decided from day one to place obstacles in the recall vote. Thus, all of the irregularities to take advantage of them, which Tulio Alvarez has summarized superbly. But on the way, something made them think that that they could win the same recall vote they opposed so much. Both strategies are not incompatible. That’s why they displayed with no morals all of the abilities of the old electoral populist culture: they took care of both, of blocking the referendum and bringing the people out to vote. They had the motivation and the resources. They are militant and they ambition hegemony. More than looking at an algorithm that explains the recall referendum, if I were an opposition politician I would try to stare in the face at a formidable enemy: A radical populism with dozens of billions of US dollars.


-No way man, you are starting to talk like Teodoro. If you are going to start with those laborious cogitations then it is true that we can no longer talk…

The hypothesis of the hacker by Ibsen Martinez

September 20, 2004

Funny article by Ibsen Martínez in today’s El Nacional, had to translate given its relevance to what I have been discussing in this blog and the fact that one has to keep a sense of humor above all.


The hypothesis of the hacker (And other fantastic tales) by Ibsen Martinez


 


I have heard no less than six versions about the hypothesis of the hacker:


 


The canonical version of the same supposes that at some point the Chavista high command hired the services of a Russian hacker to twist the results of the recall referendum- A Russian hacker… suggestive idea, without any doubt.


 


-Why Russian? I asked close up to the last “analyst” that told the story in my presence.


-What are you saying?


-Why is the hacker in your version Russian? I ask, because I have also heard he is German.


-The hacker Diosdado hired is Russian. For a reason I ignore, Russia produces the sharpest hackers in the world. Everybody knows that. The hacker that twisted the results was Russian.


-The surprising thing is that other people say he is German.


-They are not well informed; they say something just to say it: Diosdado’s hacker is Russian.


-At another bar I heard say he was Cuban. And that it was Silvio Rodriguez who brought him hidden among his musicians.


-A Cuban hacker? Absurd! It’s amazing to see what irresponsible people invent. Cuba is not well known for its hackers: prostitutes, bongo players, home run hitters, water polo trainers, all of that, maybe, but hackers in Cuba? I am telling you: The hacker is Russian.


-Accepted: He is Russian. Now tell me how they hired him.


-They have all of the money. With that money you hire anything you want. Why are you so surprised? PDVSA has the bills to hire the hacker who intervened the bidirectionality of the Smartmatic Plus boxes. That’s all, it is that simple: that’s how they screwed us.


-Sorry, but I like fluff; if you are going to bullshit me, I have the right to request that the bullshit be reasonably elaborated. If there is something that can give some semblance of veracity to bullshit, is the details. I would like the details of when, where and by whom was the Russian hacker hired. It would please my credulity to know at least what was the Russian’s hacker name, Vassily? Dimitri? Evguenny? Yuri? And since we are talking about it, why couldn’t it be a Russian woman? It would not be peculiar to have a female hacker in a market for hackers as effervescent as the Russian one: Nadehsda? Tatiana? Svetlana?


-Are you calling me a bulshitter?


-No; I am simply asking that you tell me the name of the hacker


-Nobody calls me a bulshitter


-Don’t sweat, “broder”, I am not calling you a bulshitter. In reality the hypothesis of a hacker…


-It is not a “hypothesis”. I am not a man of “hypothesis”. I am telling you what happened; the midnight of August 15th. the Russian hacker stuck it to us up to the point where it says the brand name.


-Ok, don’t get all pissed off. In reality, the intervention of a Russian hacker as part of the technological fraud in a Latinoamerican referendum is simply fascinating. It is something that deserves an article in Slate or in Gatopardo. But understand that I would get high much easier if you give me more details. For example, where did they go get the Russian hacker? To Russia?


-Don’t’ be infantile: The hacker is Russian, but that does not mean he lives in Russia. A hacker can live anywhere he wants; his work transcends geography because he lives in hyperspace. The hacker is Russian…


-Let’s call him Vladimir.


-OK, let’s say his name is Vladimir. Shit on your pants: Vladimir lives in California. In Silicon Valley to be more precise.


Silicon Valley! That makes sense.


-Of course it makes sense! Diosdado got in touch with him long time ago, chatting on the Web. They are old friends. Virtual friends. It seems Vladimir was also a communications engineer in Vladivostok, before the fall of the Berlin wall, a long time before he emigrated to the US. That’s where the elective affinity between Diosdado and Vladimir comes from. Both were one day communications engineers.


-Who would have imagined it! Diosdado Cabello having on line friendships!


-Well, let me tell you that one of the characteristics of post modernity is the return to epistolary literature, via Internet. The lost art of writing to friends, and in general to dear ones, has returned in the XXIst century to stay. There are virtual romances, people that find their mate and get married via the Web. People that get Viagra on the Web, that find spare parts for their 66 Valliant on the Web. Why couldn’t Diosdado Cabello find a friend via the Web? Somebody he has never seen, but with whom he established, in time, a close friendship, a stimulating and sustained link of the purely intellectual type. Diosdado maybe Chavista, but even Chavistas have friends.


-No, I am not saying anything against it. That part of your tale is very consistent. Let’s recapitulate: Diosdado has a Russian friend whose name is Vladimir, a friend from the Web and he tells him that he is worried because everything indicated that the No was going to lose the recall.


-Exactly, that is how the shit came down: Diosdado, very concerned because the polls yielded a victorious Si, arrived home one night, served himself a scotch, connected to the Web and began chatting with Vladimir, his virtual buddy from Silicon Valley: And, Vladimir asked him about the voting machines, asked him if there is no way to fiddle with the software and Diosdado, disconsolate, says no, that unfortunately for him, the Smartmatic Plus ™ boxes are tamper proof. And he is not saying it: It is certified by Quiros Corradi and Maria Corina Machado; two factors characterized as the enemy. “The REP is fine” says Maria Corina in a press conference; “The machines can be trusted” says Quiros Corradi in a press conference. Nothing can be done, Diosdado chats, and we have to resign ourselves to a loss.


-Piece of shit, no?


-Imagine


-So?


-Vladimir chats with Diosdado: ”Don’t sweat it Diosdadovitch: find me the diagram of those machines-the so called blueprint- and you ill see how we are going to find a way around the referendum. Turns out Diosdado and Vladimir had been friends for years, but he did not know that Vladimir was a three drum hacker until that night. Imagine!


-Shit, wait, let’s order another one, this story is great.


-So the shit is that Vladimir who is a Ukrainian wizard “breaks the code” of the Smartmatic Plus ™.


-Just like the British counterspies deciphered the Enigma machines in the Second Wold War


-Exactly. And with only twenty four hours to go for the referendum. Things were tougher than anyone imagines. The guy rode the bidirectionality, alone, with a Vodka Tonic by his side, from Silicon Valley, in permanent communication with Diosdado, he began modelling the results with vote intentions and this and that. Who cares about Hausmann’s algorithm? It was a Russian hacker that screwed us!


-Incredible. It gives you a lot to think about. The perfect crime. No evidence, no smoking gun.


-That Russian already collected and you are going to find him the day when Hell freezes over. That’s why I am not going to vote in the regional elections. What for? So that Vladimir can laugh at me? No way! I wasn’t born yesterday.


-I have another version, equally believable, I think.


-Let’s see.


-The Chavismo decided from day one to place obstacles in the recall vote. Thus, all of the irregularities to take advantage of them, which Tulio Alvarez has summarized superbly. But on the way, something made them think that that they could win the same recall vote they opposed so much. Both strategies are not incompatible. That’s why they displayed with no morals all of the abilities of the old electoral populist culture: they took care of both, of blocking the referendum and bringing the people out to vote. They had the motivation and the resources. They are militant and they ambition hegemony. More than looking at an algorithm that explains the recall referendum, if I were an opposition politician I would try to stare in the face at a formidable enemy: A radical populism with dozens of billions of US dollars.


-No way man, you are starting to talk like Teodoro. If you are going to start with those laborious cogitations then it is true that we can no longer talk…

Who killed the Venezuelans at the border?

September 19, 2004

On Friday, six Venezuelan soldiers and a PDVSA technician were killed by a group of “irregulars” in Apure State. In characteristic fashion, we will probably never know the truth:


1-The Minister of Defense of Venezuela blames the Colombian paramilitary or drug traffickers. Translation: We can not blame our friends from the Colombian guerrilla, FARC, but we have no clue who did it.


 


2-The Colombian Foreign Minister blames the FARC guerrillas. Translation: We can not blame our friends the paramilitary, but we have no clue who did it.


 


3-El Nacional quotes sources within the Venezuelan military, as saying it was a FARC group of 20 people who did the killings.


 


I’ll go with 3) these sources usually know better and say the truth more often than the Ministers from either side.


 


Note 1: You would be pleased to know that the Government is using F-16’s to look for those that did this. At last they are put to use, I am not sure how a pilot on an F-16 can have time to look out for 15-20 people walking around, but this is a revolution after all.


 


Note 2: I don’t usually plug my Orchids section (not often at least), but you should be curious about the picture of whta may be my favorite orchid, beautiful, majestic and elegant.

Rigobon on Carter Center response: Statistically incorrect

September 19, 2004

As I said in a previous post, I did not want to give my opinion on the Carter Center response to Rigobon and Haussman until I heard from the experts, but I did use the word “silly” to refer some parts of that report, maybe I should have used amateur and Roberto Rigobon from MIT agrees. A reader points out in the comments that Rigobon’s response is in El Universal, which must not have been in the print edition which I read. .


Rigobon’s response centers on two issues:


 


1) The Carter Center said that the correlation between signatures and votes was the same for the votes and the audit.


 


2) The Carter Center said the averages in the audited sample match the averages of the vote.


 


These the are the arguments in each case:


 


1)      It was with respect to this part that I used the word silly, Rigobon seems to agree. He says :”This argument is statistically incorrect because i) The correlation between a variable with itself is one , ii) The correlation between a variable and 10% of itself is also one”


 


Basically, what Rigobon is saying is that the correlation coefficient, which measures how well two things follow each other will be very similar for the signatures compared to the votes or for the signatures compared to only part of the vote. Then, if you removed part of the SI votes when you tampered with the votes, the correlation will be the same or similar and thus the Carter Center has proven absolutely nothing about the problem at hand.


 


2)                 The Carter Center argues that the averages for the sample are similar to those in the audit. Rigobon says that this is statistically incorrect and you can construct a set of results that maintains the averages but in no way reflects the true results.


 


Rigobon gives an example using a Florida election to show how you would maintain averages the same, while tampering with the results. Basically what he says is that in order to have the same averages in both cases, you have to give the same weight to the audit as the changes you made in the vote. Basically, imagine this: Suppose the fraud involved half the machines being tampered with, then the audit would be performed half in the correct machines and half in the ones you tampered with.


 


By the way, the Carter Center says that the averages were the same, however, the average number of voters per machine in the audit was 404, in the election it was 440. I don’t know if this is statistically significant, but they are certainly not the same and did the Carter Center notice this difference?.


 


While Rigobon makes no mention of it, the Carter Center report mentions a study of the random number generator to check that it was indeed random, by making it generate samples of voting machines. To me this was also silly, the random number generator in my Excel spreadsheet would do the same, today and now, but I could have used it (or not!) the day of the selection of ballot boxes to be audited in such a way that it would have picked a certain sequence of boxes or generated an output that was internally replaced (even within Excel!) by a prearranged table.


 


Sumate has criticized that the Carter Center does not identify who did this report. I imagine that the reason is to avoid the problem they have had with people directly contacting its experts to show they are wrong. This has the ¨non-political” consequence that academics like to preserve their academic reputation and can be convinced to change their mind. With this report nobody knows the author, so there is no intellectual integrity or honesty to be compromised other than that of the Carter Center.  Thus, the Carter Center continues to act with superficiality and in this new case, with less transparency than ever.

Land reform in the robolucion

September 19, 2004

What one pro-Chavez leader of the Federation of Farmers thinks about land reform in the Chavez era:


“The land is for those that work it and not for those that own it was the saying in the adeco times in the sixties, in reference to the implementation of agrarian reform. Those were stormy times, my parents tell me, when at all times, anarchy and populism were the rule when it came time to assigning productive land, much like it is happening in the Bolivarian revolution.


 


The populist and pork barrel euphoria of the beginnings of the democratic era, did not allow for the planning, the ordering, the giving away of land titles and the necessary census to know, truly know, who was capable of receiving land and make it produce. It was all a complete mess (despelote!) that killed the law that became, according to the experts, a model for the agrarian sector in Latin America. Today, unfortunately we are repeating the same errors. I would even say that it is even worse, because in Betancourt’s time Government officials were filled with good intentions, in contrast with the hoodlums that currently lead the Ministry of Agriculture and Land who are filled with revenge and hate towards anyone that is not with the revolutionary process. That is why I propose that the first revolutionary invasions should take place in floors 13, 14 and nearby floors of the East Tower of Parque Central, with the objective of removing from the roots the corrupt, incapable and inefficient elements that have overtaken the Ministry of Agriculture and Land.


 


What guarantee do producers have that the land will not be invaded by people foreign to the agricultural sector, when those that lead the institutions of the sector are highway hoodlums? What guarantee is there that the supposedly unused lands are going to be occupied by people that know what they are doing and not by militants of the Chavismo, whose intention is to take over the land to either sell it or rent it later , much like it is happening with some housing in Caracas? Is not easy, I insist, first let’s get rid of the misery traffickers that lead the Ministry of Agriculture and Land and then let’s give away the land to those that truly want to work it. By the way, the number one estate owner continues to be the State; it is there where the process of invading land should begin. “

On Mathematical models of the recall vote and fraud, part X: 2nd. Simon Bolivar Seminar

September 19, 2004

On Thursday the second Simon Bolivar University seminar on Statistical Analysis of the referendum process was held. There were supposed to be three talks, but nature conspired against Luis Raul Pericchi, who was in Puerto Rico, and was unable to come to Venezuela due to hurricane Jeanne. Then, they planned a videoconference, but unfortunately the island lost all electric power, making it impossible to set it up. It will be tentatively scheduled for next Thursday.


You can find the program for these conferences here, I though all presentations would be placed there, but only one of them has so far been posted, more on that particular one later.


 


-There was talk by Rafael Torrealba from the Math Department at Universidad Centro Occidental Lisandro Alvarado. The talk would have been useful two or three weeks ago, but by now it is too simplistic a model to be useful. Basically, Torrealba calculated the probability of coincidences assuming all machines have 500 voters and approximating the binomial distribution by a “box” with zero probability above and below a standard deviation. Using this, Torrealba got that coincidences were as likely as observed in the recall vote and cited Rubin’s work, but was unaware of Taylor, Valladares and Jimenez. Thus, it was too crude at this point to make a point.


 


Torrealba also showed some voter distributions from the Barquisimeto area where he lives to discuss the implications of applying a binomial distribution.


 


-There was a second talk by Isbelia Martin on the binomial distribution and the vote from the recall. She did a more complete presentation of the results I summarized here. In the talk she presented much more material than the one I showed and if she places her presentation online I will link it in the future here.


 


What she did was to present the data for a textbook binomial state, Vargas State, and compare it to the data I presented on Miranda State. There are more anomalies to the data that I discussed, including the fact that if one does a fit through the “clouds” of results to obtain the average for each cloud, they do not intersect zero as they should. Additionally, she and her colleagues find that in some cases the same center has machines in both clouds, which obviously makes no sense.


 


-Jimenez, Jimenez and Marcano have now placed a simplified version of their work on coincidences here, I wish everyone would make their work available like that; it would make discussions more lively and interesting.


 


What they have done is essentially to use what is called a bootstrap method, which is a basically a simulation of the vote using the actual data from the recall referendum and modeling the details of the structure of the centers, tables (mesas) and machines. They allow all variables to fluctuate so that they do not have to assume the data is random which would not be if it had been intervened with.


 


Jimenez et al. do also a more detailed calculation of the problem by looking not only at the number of coincidences in the SI or No votes, but by looking at Si, No and all votes and comparing the probability of coincidences for each type of center. That is, they not only calculate how many centers had coincidences in two machines, but calculated how many centers with two machines, had coincidences in any of the three numbers (Si, No or sum of votes), how many centers with three machines did, how many with four etc. In this fashion one has a wider number of probabilities to compare the real data to what the simulations say.


 


They then did 1238 simulations and calculated the same probabilities for centers from 2 to 11 machines. In this manner they found that in general, the proportion of coincidences is higher in the actual vote that in the simulations, which led them to do a test of ranges, calculating the probability that the observed number of coincidences in the recall vote may occur for each center with n=2,3,4…..11 machines. In this manner, it is not simply a matter of asking what the probability of two machines coinciding is, but what is the probability that centers with two machines had the level of coincidences observed.


 


You can see the results in their paper in Table 3, but I will summarize some cases with examples:


 


Centers with two machines: The probability of observing the number of Si coincidences seen was 0.0323, the number of No coincidences was 0.7746 and the number of total vote coincidences was 0.0638. Thus, while low, it was probable that there were that many coincidences.


 


Centers with four machines: The probability of observing that number of Si coincidences was ZERO, with the probability of No coincidences being 0.2883 and the probability of total votes coinciding 0.00807. Similarly low probabilities were observed for the total number of coincidences in centers with 6 and 7 machines or extremely low probabilities in Si coincidences for centers with six machines.


 


The authors conclude:


 


-The repetitions observed in the Si vote and the total number of voters per machine in one center are considerably larger than expected. It is strange, but probable


 


-The repetitions observed in the NO votes are absolutely credible and in many cases, close to what was expected.


 


-The repetitions observed in the Si votes in centers with 4 machines and the number of voters in centers with six machines are extreme cases of their analysis. In these cases the author CAN NOT accept the hypothesis that the repetitions are due to randomness.


 


This last conclusion is the strongest found in the study of the coincidences in the number of votes within one center and it says the data could not have been random.