Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What's to stop a family member...[from] influenc[ing] your vote? This is also a problem with mail-in ballots. (It’s why I believe early votes should be allowed to be overwritten by in-person votes.) The issue with smartphone voting with selfie verification is almost everyone’s phones contain selfies. (Americans overseas are also likely to have a photo ID on their camera roll.) So controlling the phone means control…
> It’s why I believe early votes should be allowed to be overwritten by in-person votes. It's an interesting idea, though how would you maintain the secret ballot? If you ask them to make a "negative vote" they can suddenly vote three times without any chance of being caught.
“A Horrifically Bad Idea”: Smartphone Voting Is Coming
101–110 of 377 posts
Re: “A Horrifically Bad Idea”: Smartphone Voting Is Coming
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
how do you validate mail in ballots? I am more worried about votes where we have to verify an absent voter simply because the chance of fraud increases. Fraud not only in not knowing if it is the actual voter but also because we cannot insure their vote was not forced. my state had early voting for weeks so there really isn't a "voting day" issue here. (Georgia). Now I have not looked but how many other states offer…
Oregon has had mail-in ballots only for decades and voter fraud is as close to a non-issue as statistically possible, easily on par with in-person voter fraud -- which is also extremely rare. It also boosts turnout and saves money, and it's great to sit there and look over your ballot at your leisure. We used to have voting parties where we'd all sit around and actually talk about the ballot issues and candidates one…
Re: “A Horrifically Bad Idea”: Smartphone Voting Is Coming
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
> On an optically isolated (phyiscally receive only) server which only receives codes sent from the application servers and produces results. And how does it count votes per candidate then? > Yes. More secure than Diebold machines to be certain. That seems very questionable.
> And how does it count votes per candidate then? Codes can be simply be computed as HMAC(secret key, SIN + candidate) or something similar, the user and any attacker without the secret key just has a random string of bits. You do realize votes are tallied by computer currently, right? Most of these just rely on phone-based systems that often expose interfaces to news orgs and such. The sort of interface I'm talking…
In Switzerland, were you vote on referendums up to three times a year [which can be pretty complex issues] votes are cast on paper and counted manually.
Vote counting is semi volountary, but rather well paid, at about 32$ an hour in Zurich.
First results, with the exception of parliamentary votes, which are more complex, are in two hours after the polling places close. Final results usually don't take longer than four or five hours.
Please don't come with the argument that it's a small country, which can not be compared to a huge country like the US. Its' a matter of scaling appropriately on a communcal level and being willing to spend money on it.
Of course this has a price, but the question to ask is: Is it not worth the price to guarantee the integrity of your democratic system?
Re: “A Horrifically Bad Idea”: Smartphone Voting Is Coming
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Moving voting day from a Tuesday to a Sunday would also make a big difference. There are many people who have have informed opinions but can't afford to take off work (write-up for being late to work/take off early, lost income, transport issues). Also that would avoid removing a school day since most public schools are used for polling. Another option would be to switch to make mail-in ballots only.
how do you validate mail in ballots? I am more worried about votes where we have to verify an absent voter simply because the chance of fraud increases. Fraud not only in not knowing if it is the actual voter but also because we cannot insure their vote was not forced. my state had early voting for weeks so there really isn't a "voting day" issue here. (Georgia). Now I have not looked but how many other states offer…
The first time I voted, I remember being shocked at the premise that you could tick a box and vote for one party across the board.
Re: “A Horrifically Bad Idea”: Smartphone Voting Is Coming
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
That might be difficult as many churches are polling stations and they'd have services on that day. They could effectively be closed for 4-7 hrs that day. For many, their service would trump any political duties you might feel they are owed.
move the polling station then?
Re: “A Horrifically Bad Idea”: Smartphone Voting Is Coming
#106If we think that not enough people are voting, the way to solve this is NOT through get-out-the-vote efforts, voter registration drives, and tools like this to make it easier to cast a vote. These are not the bottleneck. Voting may be a duty, but it's one that carries a lot of responsibility. Getting ignorant people to cast poorly-informed votes does not help our society. And I think that people realize this. So when…
I vote in one of the most complicated areas in the country: San Francisco. I had to make 40 different choices for a variety of different local, regional, state, and federal offices, plus 14 ballot propositions. There was an excellent local ballot guide, which voters receive on paper and can view online. [1] The State of California produces a good guide as well, again on paper and online. [2] For areas where I needed more information, there was plenty available. The nonpartisan League of Women Voters has a nice site with general information [3] and both the local and state chapters produce their own good-government recommendations on ballot props. [4] Plenty of organizations have recommendations as well; I looked at several different ballot guides produced by individuals and organizations.
And you know why I did all this work? Because I had to vote. I was not particularly informed on the intricacies of bond funding and government budgeting before this. That's how it has always been. The first time I voted at 18, I surely made some choices I'd now regard as woefully uninformed. Until then I had no skin in the game! But each election I vote, see the outcome, and have more incentive to do better next time. And I do.
So no, the bottleneck is not information. There's a ton of it out there. The bottleneck is also not information access. If well-presented information doesn't land in one's mailbox (and it should!), it's a Google search away. The problem is that voting in America is needlessly hard.
How do I know? The nice people at the Center for Civic Design [4] actually research this. They have done hundreds of interviews with voters. And they write about the problems. [6] We also see, both historically and currently, that people seek partisan advantage by making the registration and voting process needlessly difficult. If those barriers didn't work to discourage voters, self-serving politicians wouldn't be putting them in place.
I have helped register hundreds of people to vote. Not one of them wasn't excited to take part. Not one of them struck me as unserious about exercising their franchise. So I am 100% for voter registration, GOTV, and removing artificial barriers to voting. And I'm 100% for good schools, so that future voters are well prepared. And I think everybody in favor of democracy should be.
[1] https://voterguide.sfelections.org/en
[2] http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/
[4] https://www.lwvsf.org/ and https://lwvc.org/
[6] e.g.: https://medium.com/civic-designing/the-epic-journey-of-ameri...
Re: “A Horrifically Bad Idea”: Smartphone Voting Is Coming
#107If we think that not enough people are voting, the way to solve this is NOT through get-out-the-vote efforts, voter registration drives, and tools like this to make it easier to cast a vote. These are not the bottleneck. Voting may be a duty, but it's one that carries a lot of responsibility. Getting ignorant people to cast poorly-informed votes does not help our society. And I think that people realize this. So when…
Re: “A Horrifically Bad Idea”: Smartphone Voting Is Coming
#108Voting is a solved problem: fill in some box on paper. What is automating it ever going to solve?
Increasing participation? I won't drive out of my way and queue somewhere to vote. Sure, many people think the solution to this is shaming me for not caring enough about democracy, but it is obviously not working. If it were easy and safe to vote from my phone, I may be more inclined to vote.
Re: “A Horrifically Bad Idea”: Smartphone Voting Is Coming
#109If we think that not enough people are voting, the way to solve this is NOT through get-out-the-vote efforts, voter registration drives, and tools like this to make it easier to cast a vote. These are not the bottleneck. Voting may be a duty, but it's one that carries a lot of responsibility. Getting ignorant people to cast poorly-informed votes does not help our society. And I think that people realize this. So when…
A big part of the problem I feel is choice fatigue. Its by design that when you go to vote in a US election you are often voting for sometimes 20 or more different positions, and because of the sheer quantity of people you are supposed to audit this way it becomes impossible to thoroughly investigate all your choices if each one takes an hour of research. You can't ask your average citizen to spend 20+ hours in advan…
Re: “A Horrifically Bad Idea”: Smartphone Voting Is Coming
#110I saw this short twitter thread listing some of problems that are especially apparent from a foreign perspective:
https://twitter.com/MackieJonathan/status/105996240724471808...