Recurring |
one_organization, multiple_organization |
(a) The software failure incident related to the election software glitch in Antrim County, Michigan, has happened again within the same organization or with its products and services. The Michigan GOP Chairwoman Laura Cox mentioned during a press conference that in addition to Antrim County, 47 other counties also use the same software [107910]. This indicates that the software failure incident occurred within the same organization or with its products and services in multiple counties in Michigan.
(b) The software failure incident related to the election software glitch in Antrim County, Michigan, has also happened at multiple organizations. The incident in Antrim County raised concerns about the election software used in 47 other counties in Michigan, indicating that the same software was used across multiple organizations [107910]. This suggests that the software failure incident was not isolated to just one organization but potentially affected multiple organizations using the same software. |
Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident in Antrim County, Michigan, where 6,000 votes were incorrectly given to Biden before being corrected, was attributed to a software glitch. The glitch was noticed by local election officials in Antrim County, and it was related to the system development or system updates. Officials were working with the company that provides election software and hardware to determine what happened, indicating a potential issue introduced during the development phases [107910].
(b) The software failure incident in Antrim County could also be linked to the operation of the system. The glitch was noticed by local election officials during the operation of the system when results showed a significant discrepancy in the vote count. The incident was caught during the operation of the system, leading to a correction in the vote tally, suggesting an operational factor in the failure [107910]. |
Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident in Antrim County, Michigan, where 6,000 votes were incorrectly given to Biden due to a software glitch, was attributed to factors originating from within the system. The glitch was noticed by local election officials in Antrim County, and it was determined that the machine itself counted the ballots correctly. Officials were working with the company that provides election software and hardware to determine what happened [107910]. |
Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in Antrim County, Michigan, was initially attributed to a software glitch that incorrectly gave 6,000 votes to Biden before being corrected by county election officials [107910]. The glitch was noticed by local election officials, and it was mentioned that the machine itself counted the ballots correctly, indicating that the error was not due to human actions but rather a non-human factor introduced by the software [107910].
(b) However, there were discussions and speculations about the incident potentially being a result of human error. Posthumus Lyons mentioned that what happened in Antrim County could have been human error if it had not been caught by the public or others, suggesting the possibility of human actions contributing to the failure [107910]. |
Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
hardware |
(a) The software failure incident in Antrim County, Michigan, was attributed to hardware issues. Local election officials noticed a software glitch that incorrectly gave 6,000 votes to Biden before correcting the error, ultimately giving Trump a lead. Deputy county administrator Jeremy Scott mentioned that the machine itself counted the ballots correctly, indicating that the issue originated from hardware rather than software [107910]. |
Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
non-malicious |
(a) The software failure incident in Antrim County, Michigan, where 6,000 votes were incorrectly given to Biden due to a software glitch, was initially claimed by Republicans to be a malicious act aimed at benefiting Biden. Michigan GOP Chairwoman Laura Cox advocated for a close examination of election results in 47 other counties using the same software to check for discrepancies, indicating a suspicion of intentional manipulation [107910].
(b) However, it was later suggested that the incident was likely a non-malicious error rather than a deliberate act of manipulation. Posthumus Lyons mentioned that the error would have been caught in the county canvass even if it had not been noticed by the public, indicating that it was more likely a mistake or glitch rather than a malicious act [107910]. |
Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions |
(a) The intent of the software failure incident related to poor_decisions:
- The software failure incident in Antrim County, Michigan, where 6,000 votes were incorrectly given to Biden, was initially claimed to be a result of a software glitch [107910].
- Michigan GOP Chairwoman Laura Cox advocated for counties to closely examine the election results to check for discrepancies, aiming to discredit the legitimacy of the election [107910].
(b) The intent of the software failure incident related to accidental_decisions:
- Posthumus Lyons suggested that the incident in Antrim County was likely due to human error and could have been caught during the county canvass if not caught earlier [107910]. |
Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence |
(a) The software failure incident in Antrim County, Michigan, where 6,000 votes were incorrectly given to Biden due to a software glitch, was initially attributed to development incompetence. Michigan GOP Chairwoman Laura Cox advocated for a close examination of election results in 47 other counties using the same software to check for discrepancies, indicating a lack of confidence in the software's accuracy [107910].
(b) On the other hand, there were suggestions that the incident in Antrim County could have been due to accidental factors. Posthumus Lyons mentioned that the error would have been caught in the county canvass if it had not been noticed earlier, implying that it was more of a human error that was eventually rectified [107910]. |
Duration |
temporary |
(a) The software failure incident in Antrim County, Michigan, where a glitch incorrectly gave 6,000 votes to Biden before being corrected, can be considered temporary. The glitch was caught and corrected by county election officials, leading to a change in the results and giving Trump a lead in the county [107910]. The incident was attributed to a software glitch that was noticed and rectified, indicating that it was not a permanent failure but rather a temporary issue that was resolved. |
Behaviour |
crash, omission, value, other |
(a) crash: The software glitch in Antrim County, Michigan, resulted in incorrect vote tallies being reported initially, leading to a situation where Biden was mistakenly shown as winning the county. This can be considered a form of a crash as the system lost its state and did not perform its intended function of accurately tallying votes [107910].
(b) omission: The software glitch omitted to perform its intended function of accurately counting votes, leading to an incorrect initial result in Antrim County, Michigan [107910].
(c) timing: The software failure incident in Antrim County, Michigan, resulted in the system performing its intended functions incorrectly at a specific time, leading to an initial incorrect vote count that was later corrected [107910].
(d) value: The software glitch in Antrim County, Michigan, caused the system to perform its intended function of counting votes incorrectly, resulting in an incorrect vote tally that favored Biden initially [107910].
(e) byzantine: There is no specific mention of the software failure incident exhibiting behaviors of inconsistency or erratic responses in the provided article.
(f) other: The software failure incident in Antrim County, Michigan, led to questions about the accuracy and integrity of the election results, prompting a closer examination of the software and hardware used for vote counting in other counties as well. This can be considered as an additional behavior of the software failure incident [107910]. |