Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fearful of Hacking, Dutch Will Count Ballots by Hand

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 81 posts

Re: Fearful of Hacking, Dutch Will Count Ballots by Hand

#31

Post by mulmen »

pepve wrote: post #22

The article confuses two things. First there is voting by paper ballot and manually counting them. We have been doing that for about nine years now. Second is aggregating the votes from all the polling stations, this used to be done with software, but with this decision it will be done manually. The immediate reason for this is an investigation into the security of that software which concluded that it was not safe,…

Excel would be a terrifying proposition. Much like you should assume the network is always compromised you should also assume the spreadsheet is always broken.

Re: Fearful of Hacking, Dutch Will Count Ballots by Hand

#32

Post by vkou »

mattnewton wrote: post #23
vkou wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You wouldn't say that that somebody hacked Iceland's democracy. No, you wouldn't. The wailing and gnashing of teeth over the DNC hacks are all because the Democratic leadership is unwilling to accept responsibility for putting forward a bad candidate. Better blame the Russians, instead! If only the public didn't know the truth, we would have won!

You aren't wrong about the Democratic Party putting forth a weak candidate, but it is concerning that there weren't similar actions on the other side. The attacks were targeting a specific party alone and seem to be motivated by foreign geopolitical interests, not in the American public's interest. There is a reason we want equal time laws for example, because if I constantly hear one side of the argument, it doesn't…

If the press digs up dirt on a candidate, should they not publish it until they dig up some dirt on their opponent? What if it's a foreign newspaper? Should Deep Throat's leaks not been published, because they would influence the election? What if he were a card-holding Democrat? What if he were a reptilian agent?

I hate Trump as much as the next person, but there was no shortage of actual dirt that was dug up on him. There was no democratic outrage over the source of his comments about grabbing people's genitals... Or that one page of his tax return.

Re: Fearful of Hacking, Dutch Will Count Ballots by Hand

#33

Post by sampo »

mladenkovacevic wrote: post #12
wila wrote: post #7

This is due to a Dutch ethical hacker (Sijmen Ruwhof) investigating the way that our elections work. He had posted a great research document [0] that showed how bad our current system was. Two days later, we're back to paper. Thanks Sijmen :) [0] https://sijmen.ruwhof.net/weblog/1166-how-to-hack-the-upcomi...

Why does everyone think that hacking the DNC amounted to "hacking the election". Did anyone complain when Iceland PM resigned as a result of the Panama Papers leak and the large-scale protests that ensued? You wouldn't say that that somebody hacked Iceland's democracy. The truth came out and whatever happened was a natural result of that.

> Why does everyone think that hacking the DNC amounted to "hacking the election".

In the American two-party political system, it is very important who the two candidates are, and how they are chosen. While it is formally only the business of the two political parties to choose their candidates however they see fit, in practice also the primaries are an important part of democracy.

If America had a more modern multiparty system, the decisions of individual parties would be less important for the whole.

Most European countries run their presidential elections in two rounds: First round all parties can run their candidates, and second round is between the two winners of the first round. In America the primaries pretty much take the role of the first round in the European model.

(Also, the whole idea of counting votes instead of counting winners per electoral district is a bit alien to the American system, so it's not easy to see how the European system could be implemented in America.)

Re: Fearful of Hacking, Dutch Will Count Ballots by Hand

#34

Post by rhcom2 »

vkou wrote: post #32
mattnewton wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You aren't wrong about the Democratic Party putting forth a weak candidate, but it is concerning that there weren't similar actions on the other side. The attacks were targeting a specific party alone and seem to be motivated by foreign geopolitical interests, not in the American public's interest. There is a reason we want equal time laws for example, because if I constantly hear one side of the argument, it doesn't…

If the press digs up dirt on a candidate, should they not publish it until they dig up some dirt on their opponent? What if it's a foreign newspaper? Should Deep Throat's leaks not been published, because they would influence the election? What if he were a card-holding Democrat? What if he were a reptilian agent? I hate Trump as much as the next person, but there was no shortage of actual dirt that was dug up on him…

The press "digging up dirt" is surely different than the illegal hacking and wholesale release of all private email correspondence. Deep Throat provided info on the current President's illegal actions to a journalist, not just "dirt".

Even if we accept that it is better to know the info in the DNC leaks, it is still a big problem if a foreign government can wield its influence so easily through illegal computer intrusions. At least to me.

Re: Fearful of Hacking, Dutch Will Count Ballots by Hand

#35

Post by kordless »

I live in Contra Costa County, California. When my wife and I went to vote during the election, my wife's name "had a problem". A lady came out with a binder to compare to the roll where people sign before grabbing their forms. I got my forms, but my wife was told she had to take an absentee ballot because her name was not in the binder, but was on the roll list. Her name was highlighted in the list on the roll that I signed, just above my name. My name was not highlighted and I was allowed to sign the roll and then get my ballot to vote. I only saw a few pages of the roll, but there were at least three people highlighted on the two pages that were open to signing. The other pages definitely had highlighted entries and my comment to my wife was something along the lines of "why is a substantial number of people highlighted?" when we first walked up.

After a bit of back and forth, someone in charge agreed to let her vote given she was in the roll book, which is the "truth" of who can vote and who cannot. One lady was still somewhat insistent she be given an absentee ballot. I'm still wondering about it today given all the claims around "hacking".

Re: Fearful of Hacking, Dutch Will Count Ballots by Hand

#36

Post by secfirstmd »

This is total, total aside. But having been in vote counting centres for hours on end during elections here in Ireland. You really feel the democratic process (also how badly educated some people are about how to fill out something basic like a ballot). A shift to digital methods would really change that, and it's something I will miss. Sometimes, tradition, like Prime Ministers Question time in the UK, is something that has important effects worth keeping. You really see the democracy in action!

Re: Fearful of Hacking, Dutch Will Count Ballots by Hand

#37

Post by emptyfile »

Jraf wrote: post #18

In France we count all ballots by hand. As every ballot station count only his ballots, it's quick. For a presidential election, maybe 30 minutes. The counting is done by the citizens, so no (easy) frauds are possible. All ballots are visible, the process is transparent, no suspicion. I personally think that a 30min delay to get the election results is worth the wait.

Same in my country, never thought of this as being outdated, just the simplest most cost effective solution for a system that has to be totally secure.

Re: Fearful of Hacking, Dutch Will Count Ballots by Hand

#38

Post by Someone »

Jraf wrote: post #18

In France we count all ballots by hand. As every ballot station count only his ballots, it's quick. For a presidential election, maybe 30 minutes. The counting is done by the citizens, so no (easy) frauds are possible. All ballots are visible, the process is transparent, no suspicion. I personally think that a 30min delay to get the election results is worth the wait.

This isn't about that step, as that is done by hand in the Netherlands, too.

It is about what happens after that. The electronic steps after that are deemed not secure enough.

Re: Fearful of Hacking, Dutch Will Count Ballots by Hand

#39

Post by kordless »

Jraf wrote: post #18

In France we count all ballots by hand. As every ballot station count only his ballots, it's quick. For a presidential election, maybe 30 minutes. The counting is done by the citizens, so no (easy) frauds are possible. All ballots are visible, the process is transparent, no suspicion. I personally think that a 30min delay to get the election results is worth the wait.

How are the results transmitted and tabulated by hand?

Re: Fearful of Hacking, Dutch Will Count Ballots by Hand

#40

Post by bmj »

detaro wrote: post #30
bmj wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I develop software and devices used for data collection during clinical drug trials, and our single biggest "competitor" is the old paper diary. Despite evidence showing that electronic data collection for certain types of trials provides better data, people just don't "trust" anything but pen and paper (never mind the fact that patients could sit in their cars before an appointment and fill in a month's worth of dat…

> people just don't "trust" anything but pen and paper Who is people here? Participants, scientists, people in other roles?

Typically sponsors, or clinical research organizations. Sometimes investigators themselves, but that will only affect us if they have the ear of the sponsor.
Post reply on HN