Live data from Hacker News

DARPA Is Building a $10M, Open-Source, Secure Voting System

motherboard.vice.com

121–130 of 303 posts

Re: DARPA Is Building a $10M, Open-Source, Secure Voting System

#121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because paper ballots increase the cost of manipulating elections.

Ironically the one recent confirmed case of a rigged election in the U.S. was rigged through paper absentee ballots.

Is it really ironic when pretty much all voting is done with paper? Of course the rigged voting would have been through paper ballots when that is what we use.

Re: DARPA Is Building a $10M, Open-Source, Secure Voting System

#123
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And add fingerprint identification, like other countries do.

You mean like the purple finger thing? I've always wondered why nobody suggests doing that in the US to help prevent or ease people's concerns about potential voter fraud. It's simple, low-tech, and hard to screw up. Unless if I'm missing something, which of course is possible. Can someone tell me what the downsides are to an idea like that?

Because voter fraud is exceedingly rare in the US. Now election fraud is a different issue.

Re: DARPA Is Building a $10M, Open-Source, Secure Voting System

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate being outright dismissive but it sounds like an expensive html/pdf form with a printer attached. I do agree that the paper trail is a great thing. I'm not fundamentally against electronic voting, but I haven't heard of a system that can really compete with the simplicity and verifiability of the immutablility you get from paper ballots inside ballot boxes being watched over by interested parties on all sides.

Paper ballots are pretty trivial to cheat too, you’re dependent on the honesty of party officials and poll watchers.

It’s also easy to design paper ballots that are really hard to use.

Re: DARPA Is Building a $10M, Open-Source, Secure Voting System

#125
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And add fingerprint identification, like other countries do.

You mean like the purple finger thing? I've always wondered why nobody suggests doing that in the US to help prevent or ease people's concerns about potential voter fraud. It's simple, low-tech, and hard to screw up. Unless if I'm missing something, which of course is possible. Can someone tell me what the downsides are to an idea like that?

Voter fraud of that form basically doesn't exist. You are already marked as voted at your designated polling place. A purple finger is just for show, even in other countries. Its like a "I Voted" sticker.

Re: DARPA Is Building a $10M, Open-Source, Secure Voting System

#126
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voting by mail is indeed vulnerable to fraud, as we saw in North Carolina last election.

When thinking about voting by mail I wouldn't consider North Carolina's system as exemplar, since it is still primarily a polling-place election. Instead, look towards Washington, Oregon, and Colorado which are states where elections are entirely by mail. Evidence of coercion or fraud is low, and engagement is high.

How do we know how many spouses are (or simply feel) compelled to vote a certain way?

I’m not saying fraud is rampant, but there’s no denying the fact that on the individual level fraud and coercion are much easier to achieve when voting is done outside the polling booth.

Re: DARPA Is Building a $10M, Open-Source, Secure Voting System

#128
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how does the current system, or any voting system, prevent coercion? If there's a gun to your head, or some other ultimatum, it seems far too late to be worrying about your vote being shared. Even if votes aren't all logged, you can still be tortured for the answer. I would much rather the country have an individual coercion problem than a mass voting fraud problem. "Voting systems should [...] not permit anyone, inc…

Ok, you put a gun to my head and tell me to vote for Hillary. I go into the ballot box and vote for Trump. I come out and you ask me if I voted Hillary. I say yes, I voted for Hillary, of course. If there is no possible way for you or me to know (edit: prove) if I'm telling the truth, how is that worth your time and energy? It's not. The benefit of a secret ballot is that it greatly reduces, if not removes, the incen…

Seems like burning an orchard for a few bad apples. It's this really that large of a concern vs voter fraud?

Re: DARPA Is Building a $10M, Open-Source, Secure Voting System

#129
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How well does it work for people with motor disabilities? Vision disabilities? Does an X mean a choice or they crossed out their choice? What happens when the pens run out of ink? What if they can’t read English? Helpers? What do you pay them? Can they understand that dialect of that obscure language? Do you trust them not to lie about what they’re marking on the ballot for someone? The truth is electronic voting mac…

Don't care, my system is still better.

Your system is stupid.

Re: DARPA Is Building a $10M, Open-Source, Secure Voting System

#130
post #60

Why does this keep coming up? What is the compelling argument against paper ballots? There is no need for results to be known immediately, so how does making voting an exercise done by computers make anything better, particularly when computers are much more vulnerable to remote interference?

Aren't counting ballots always wrong? Like every time there is a recount the number changes...

What's wrong with electronic ballots? If we can have a secure and audit-able banking system (and every other aspect of our lifes), surely we can have the same for voting?

Post reply on HN