Actually I can really understand that people will go off and buy things that they can't test.
1) Most people live in a world where you trust that someone is going to sell you something
that works. Most people do not take their car completely apart before driving it. Most people
do not do the same with their washing machine, dryer, furnace, etc. And many people will buy a
service contract that states that they will get service from one company and if it will cost
them less.. that they will return it if they don't want service from that company. Its the
world that most people live in. So when they are told that their is a nice shiney gadget that
will cost the counting, is faster, and make sure you never have to hear the word hanging chad
with your next election. Bingo.. you have a sale.
2) Most people live in a world view where technology == win. Want to make a cheaper, faster,
more reliable car.. use robots versus people. Want to make a cheaper, faster, more reliable
cloth.. use 'robotic weavers' versus people. Want to make a cheaper, faster, more reliable
election.. well why shouldn't election machines do it? And aren't the arguments against it the
same as those people who throw their sabots into the robotic weavers of the 18th century???
[No but since every technological change gets people riled who are out of a job.. it has
become a habit to downplay it as Luddite rambling.]
3) Most people are not qualified to first discern whether or not that using electronic voting
machines is better or not. 90+% of people who code would look at the Sequoia code and probably
not find as many problems. And for all the questions from people like Felten and Schneier
there are equally 'qualified' who say the opposite. And qualifications do not mean the same
everyone. Written a book on coding, or been contracted by the US government is as valid to
most people as Felten's.
So I am not surprised that lots of places bought stuff that was snake-oil. I am more surprised
that we are re-evaluating it so quickly :).