An awesome workout machine I like: Ultimate Body Press.
Real Estate in North Carolina: The Peaks at Wolf Ridge.
Attention Dial-up users! Support corporate-free media by switching to IndyLink for your internet access and hosting needs:
Here's a great CD by RudePundit:
As reported on this site on October 20th, 2005 there is a case working its way through the Florida courts that may have implications for OpenSource software and transparent elections.
A group of over 150 people who have been accused of DUI are arguing before Florida judges that the software on the breathalizer machine that implicated them should be open for review.
I have email-interviewed the lawyer for the defendants, Robert Harrison. His answers are extremely educational.
###
START OF INTERVIEW:
Paul -V-: How did your case go on Friday?
Robert Harrison: No ruling yet. The Judges indicated a decision would be entered sometime next week.
PV: While the software for the Intoxilyzer 5000 is not available for analysis, is the hardware for the Breathalyzer in Florida audited regularly?
RH: Some of the breath instruments in question are over ten years old. The State of Florida did not recertify these instruments after repair. Over time, the accumulations of repairs / modifications have become significant - to the point, no two look the same on the inside. Florida law requires the instruments to be re-approved if they have been modified.
PV: Are there any other devices that the state of Florida rejected when the vendor used proprietary software? (Follow up question: Are you aware of any devices that the federal government rejected when the vendor used proprietary software?)
RH: Not sure what you are looking for here, but I do know that this Vendor (CMI) had a least one version of the Intoxilyzer 5000 software recalled for software bugs in 1993.
PV: Many Americans do not trust electronic voting machines because they do not provide a verifiable paper ballot, and they are run on proprietary software. Do you think that your defendant's case has implications for the electronic voting-machine industry and/or the movement for a more transparent election process?
RH: This case addresses a narrow issue dealing with DUI instruments in Florida. Florida has a specific statute that provided a driver or his / her attorney is entitled to full information about the breath test.
PV: Do you, or or clients, have any other statement you'd like to make?
RH: It is important to note that all of the significant functions of the breath instrument is software, not hardware. The hardware only measures how much light is absorbed in a sample chamber for three specific wave lengths; these measurements are obtained about 5 times per second for 7 to 10 seconds. The software then analyzes this data and makes a conversion to blood alcohol level on many assumptions, some scientifically sound, others which reasonable scientists would debate.
Without knowing why the computer program is saying my client committed a crime, It is difficult to effectively challenge this evidence. The rhetorical question posed by one of the Judges to the prosecution last Friday sums it up well: "Doesn't the due process rights of the accused take precedent over a manufacturer's claim of trade secret?"
END OF INTERVIEW.
###
I would like to thank Robert Harrison for this interview. I have invited him to post comments in this thread if you have questions for him. (This thread will be open for comments until November 27, 2005.)
Bookmark/Search this post with: 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
People who register with Brainshrub.com get the following features: