changing attitudes about computerized voting?

The New York Times -- which really has done a good job of reporting on problems both technical and procedural with American elections -- reports that there could be big changes in the mechanics of voting by the 2008 presidential elections. Good. Because articles like this one (not to mention Ohio 2004, Sarasota 2006, etc) show how serious the problems with electronic voting machines is in so many places.

As I've said before, the primary concern for election officials should be making sure the elections are fair and accurately reflect the will of the electorate, and can be checked and double-checked. That manifestly isn't the case with most electronic voting machines, where a recount is just hitting the "count" button again to see if the machine gives the same answer -- which it does.