Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines • Hacker News Board

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#31

Post by icelancer » Sat, Sep 09, 2017, 9:19 AM UTC

jlgaddis wrote: post #10

stenius wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you should leave with any proof of who you voted for. I'm worried that it could be used by people to influence elections by paying for receipts from certain candidates or by punishing people who are not able to produce the correct receipt. I think we should return back to paper ballots. When there are witnesses to elections, I don't think any of them are qualified to judge if an election has been done i…

> I don't think you should leave with any proof of who you voted for. I don't think you should leave without (at least seeing ) proof that your votes were properly and accurately recorded. If that means that you have to be given a "receipt" with the names of those you voted for on it, well, so be it. It isn't like your name and/or any other personally identifiable information would be on it -- just the minimal detail…

>>If that means that you have to be given a "receipt" with the names of those you voted for on it, well, so be it. It isn't like your name and/or any other personally identifiable information would be on it -- just the minimal details needed to achieve the singlemost important purpose: verification.

Now imagine cults and other groups that pressure their members into producing those receipts with the correct candidate on them... or else.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#32

Post by NicoJuicy » Sat, Sep 09, 2017, 10:02 AM UTC

vkou wrote: post #25

dpacmittal wrote: post #24

I think blockchain is a perfect application for voting machines. Blockchain is public, immutable, cryptographic. Every voter can vote and then verify their vote was actually registered and was untampered via a web platform or something. The network can be run by the public. Ofcourse there is risk associated with the 51% attack, but it's still a more transparent process than what we have today.

Making everyone's voting record public is just about the worst possible idea for a voting system. Secret ballot is a feature, not a bug. It protects you from coercion and retaliation.

The wallet owner is secret, but can be checked by the owner and by the government

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#33

Post by thanksgiving » Sat, Sep 09, 2017, 10:22 AM UTC

fabian2k wrote: post #28

dragonwriter wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Here's a better system: you go into the voting booth. They have some envelopes and stacks of preprinted ballots, each with one candidate's name. You take a ballot for the candidate you want, and put it in the envelope. Then you come out of the booth and drop the sealed envelope in a box. Works well for elections with one race; those with a dozen offices being elected and an equal number of ballot measures make that…

This is the system used in Germany, all votes are hand-counted. And it's also used for very complicated local elections that allow very fine-grained votes for individual candidates. In extreme cases you get huge ballots with this system, see e.g. ( http://www.faz.net/aktuell/rhein-main/frankfurter-wahlzettel... ) for Frankfurt with a ~0.9 square meter ballot. Counting by hand still works even for those over-complicat…

Archived the image link: https://archive.fo/lRk7e/6d9d8907d61758e4f6185e6c7ac1cc75137...

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#34

Post by ezoe » Sat, Sep 09, 2017, 10:55 AM UTC

a_humean wrote: post #30

In the UK I walk into my local primary school/church/community hall (no more than a 5-10 min walk away), utter my name and address as identification (no other ID needed), and use a pencil to write a big 'X' against my preferences on a piece of paper I was handed when I entered the polling station. There are multiple local party volunteers (I was one in the last election) from all the major parties at all stages of th…

In the Japan I walk into my local school/community hall(on rare occasion, the church was used, no more than a 5-10 min walk away), present the voting announcement paper the govt send it to my physical address, and use a pencil to write a name of a candidates on a piece of paper I was exchanged it with my voting announcement paper.

In the Japanese writing system, candidate's name can be written in multiple ways. If writing doesn't match one of the exact registered candidates names, the human vote counter decides if it refer to the unambiguous candidate. If such candidate exists, it is counted to the voting for that candidate.

> There are multiple local party volunteers ...

Same.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#35

Post by tormeh » Sat, Sep 09, 2017, 12:05 PM UTC

NicoJuicy wrote: post #32

vkou wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Making everyone's voting record public is just about the worst possible idea for a voting system. Secret ballot is a feature, not a bug. It protects you from coercion and retaliation.

The wallet owner is secret, but can be checked by the owner and by the government

So the government knows what you voted? Great.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#36

Post by germanier » Sat, Sep 09, 2017, 12:07 PM UTC

fabian2k wrote: post #28

dragonwriter wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Here's a better system: you go into the voting booth. They have some envelopes and stacks of preprinted ballots, each with one candidate's name. You take a ballot for the candidate you want, and put it in the envelope. Then you come out of the booth and drop the sealed envelope in a box. Works well for elections with one race; those with a dozen offices being elected and an equal number of ballot measures make that…

This is the system used in Germany, all votes are hand-counted. And it's also used for very complicated local elections that allow very fine-grained votes for individual candidates. In extreme cases you get huge ballots with this system, see e.g. ( http://www.faz.net/aktuell/rhein-main/frankfurter-wahlzettel... ) for Frankfurt with a ~0.9 square meter ballot. Counting by hand still works even for those over-complicat…

I don't know about that specific one but elections with complicated rules and multiple votes (where you can "kumulieren" and "panaschieren") are usually counted with the help of software where the election officers manually enter every ballot into the computer after inspecting it visually and have to trust that the displayed end result is correct (although there are some manual consistency checks).

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#37

Post by hacst » Sat, Sep 09, 2017, 12:28 PM UTC

NicoJuicy wrote: post #32

vkou wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Making everyone's voting record public is just about the worst possible idea for a voting system. Secret ballot is a feature, not a bug. It protects you from coercion and retaliation.

The wallet owner is secret, but can be checked by the owner and by the government

You must not be able to prove who you voted for. Otherwise you are still at risk of retaliation, coercion and can sell your vote. For the very same reasons the government must not be able to know who you voted for either.

Secret paper ballots really deserve more credit. The tech might be old but it gets the essential features right.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#38

Post by yomly » Sat, Sep 09, 2017, 12:41 PM UTC

a_humean wrote: post #30

In the UK I walk into my local primary school/church/community hall (no more than a 5-10 min walk away), utter my name and address as identification (no other ID needed), and use a pencil to write a big 'X' against my preferences on a piece of paper I was handed when I entered the polling station. There are multiple local party volunteers (I was one in the last election) from all the major parties at all stages of th…

What's your point? That it's easily socially engineered?

That it is archaic, inefficient and a waste of human time?

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#39

Post by gambiting » Sat, Sep 09, 2017, 12:42 PM UTC

yomly wrote: post #38

a_humean wrote: post #30

In the UK I walk into my local primary school/church/community hall (no more than a 5-10 min walk away), utter my name and address as identification (no other ID needed), and use a pencil to write a big 'X' against my preferences on a piece of paper I was handed when I entered the polling station. There are multiple local party volunteers (I was one in the last election) from all the major parties at all stages of th…

What's your point? That it's easily socially engineered? That it is archaic, inefficient and a waste of human time?

I'd say the point is that paper voting is extremely easy to organise, but also, most importantly, extremely easy to check and verify - you just count the votes again. With electronic machines you can't really do that, you can inspect logs but any of them can be fabricated incredibly easily.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#40

Post by joosters » Sat, Sep 09, 2017, 12:46 PM UTC

yomly wrote: post #38

a_humean wrote: post #30

In the UK I walk into my local primary school/church/community hall (no more than a 5-10 min walk away), utter my name and address as identification (no other ID needed), and use a pencil to write a big 'X' against my preferences on a piece of paper I was handed when I entered the polling station. There are multiple local party volunteers (I was one in the last election) from all the major parties at all stages of th…

What's your point? That it's easily socially engineered? That it is archaic, inefficient and a waste of human time?

How is it a waste of time?

We don't hold elections that often, nor do we need their results instantly. Voting with a pencil takes about as long as voting on a touchscreen. So why is there this stupid urge to optimise?