Ask HN: Why Isn't Open Source Voting Software Mandated? • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask HN: Why Isn't Open Source Voting Software Mandated?

#131

Post by Spooky23 » Mon, Nov 16, 2020, 11:20 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #97

godelski wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume this is working under the presumption that we get rid of the voting software that already exists? This is a big part of OP's question, but I'll entertain it. You have to look at the 2000 election[0] where there was a switch to digital means. I don't have exact numbers, but I am under the impression that these machines are easier to use and are less error prone than the previous punch card methods. Your digit…

But yet again... you're talking about it relative to an alternative like punch machines... how about no machines .

Instead of having a machine reading ballots in a consistent way, you’ll have humans applying subjective judgement and fighting it.

Re: Ask HN: Why Isn't Open Source Voting Software Mandated?

#132

Post by godelski » Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 7:34 AM UTC

ploika wrote: post #127

godelski wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean if we're calling a punch ballot a machine then I think a check mark constitutes a machine. Pencil, pen, hole punch, what's the difference? It is a mark on a physical piece of paper. I think you're trying to work your solution into being correct rather than recognizing that the problem itself is extremely complicated. Given your other comments and our other conversations it is clear that you're overly simplifyi…

> Pencil, pen, hole punch, what's the difference? It is a mark on a physical piece of paper Hanging chads? You even brought up the 2000 election in the US yourself. Pencil and paper (and no machines) would have avoided that mess.

The punch card was brought about because it was more reliable than a pen and paper where marks are routinely inconsistent. This isn't a UI team where people are just changing the format willy nilly, they are making these changes for legitimate reasons. Sometimes the "simpler" solution isn't as simple and reliable as one would think from just guessing. They actually test this stuff and seek more reliable solutions. Sure, it is slow to implement the new solutions, but that doesn't mean it is less reliable than the previous one. So please stop just guessing.

Re: Ask HN: Why Isn't Open Source Voting Software Mandated?

#133

Post by godelski » Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 7:34 AM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #131

chrisseaton wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But yet again... you're talking about it relative to an alternative like punch machines... how about no machines .

Instead of having a machine reading ballots in a consistent way, you’ll have humans applying subjective judgement and fighting it.

Humans who are subjective and have a dog in the race.

Re: Ask HN: Why Isn't Open Source Voting Software Mandated?

#134

Post by godelski » Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 2:37 AM UTC

majewsky wrote: post #123

godelski wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also have to consider that polling stations are not uniform in their ratio of people to workers/machines. Some places you can just walk right in and other places you wait all day to vote. Assuming symmetry in this aspect is ignoring the fundamental problem here. If you watched the graphs update you'd notice that the small counties typically got their results quickly but the large counties took a lot longer. There…

I don't know what's going on in the US system, but what you describe sounds rather broken. In Germany (where I live and regularly volunteer as a polling worker), a larger county does not report slower than a smaller county. "Larger county" would just mean "more polling places" so that each polling place maps to about the same number of voters, therefore the load is distributed smoothly. The longest line I've ever see…

Is this true or are you just guessing? If it is true I'd like some reference to back it up because to me this doesn't even make sense logistically. Like the same effect is true in distributed computing so it would be extra weird for humans to be far superior in this manner.