This application seems very good - but still a bit amazing that lawmakers haven't just required that all data be uploaded via csv! Even if every csv was slightly different format, it would be way easier for everyone (LLM or not).
How OpenElections uses LLMs
21–30 of 60 posts
Re: How OpenElections uses LLMs
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many jurisdictions do risk-limiting audits using the original ballots, so futzing with the results wouldn't necessarily make that easier. Also, cast vote records are public in many states - those are records of each ballot cast. So people can check.
I think you mean risk limiting, right?
Re: How OpenElections uses LLMs
#23In college (about 15 years ago) I worked for a professor who was compiling precint level results for old elections. My job was just to request the info and then do manual data entry. It was abysmally slow. This application seems very good - but still a bit amazing that lawmakers haven't just required that all data be uploaded via csv! Even if every csv was slightly different format, it would be way easier for everyon…
Re: How OpenElections uses LLMs
#24In college (about 15 years ago) I worked for a professor who was compiling precint level results for old elections. My job was just to request the info and then do manual data entry. It was abysmally slow. This application seems very good - but still a bit amazing that lawmakers haven't just required that all data be uploaded via csv! Even if every csv was slightly different format, it would be way easier for everyon…
I could be wildly off-base, but I wonder if some of these systems are airgapped, and the only way the data comes off of the closed system is via printing, to avoid someone inserting a flash drive full of malware in the guise of "copying the CSV file." Obviously there are or should be technical ways to safely extract data in a digital format, but I can see a little value in the provable safety that airgapping gives yo…
Re: How OpenElections uses LLMs
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many jurisdictions do risk-limiting audits using the original ballots, so futzing with the results wouldn't necessarily make that easier. Also, cast vote records are public in many states - those are records of each ballot cast. So people can check.
I think you mean risk limiting, right?
Re: How OpenElections uses LLMs
#26Why is the original source data not available anywhere digitally? Since it's printed it is clearly already in a database somewhere . Why can't that just be made public too. Seems bizarre to OCR printed documents (although I am aware of many companies doing this to parse invoices, etc.)
Welcome to government data. One key problem is that the US has tens of thousands of local governments, and each of them get to solve problems in their own way. Digital literacy of the kind that understands why releasing a CSV file is more valuable than a PDF is rare enough that most of them won't have someone with that level of thinking in a decision making role.
That is an unfair take on it. Come out to the midwest and talk to some of the clerks in the small townships and counties out here. They do know the value of improved data and tech. And they know that investing in better tech can result in a little less money in the bank, which results in less gas to plow the roads, less money to pay someone to mow the ditches, which means on more car wrecked by hitting a deer. So the question is often not about CSV vs. PDF. It is about overall budget to do all the things that matter to the people of their town. Tech sometime just doesn't make the cut.
Besides, elections tend to have their own tech provided by the county or state, so there is standardization and additional help on such critical processes.
People running the smallest of government entities in this country tend to have pretty good heads on their shoulders. They get voted out pdq when they don't.
Re: How OpenElections uses LLMs
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Welcome to government data. One key problem is that the US has tens of thousands of local governments, and each of them get to solve problems in their own way. Digital literacy of the kind that understands why releasing a CSV file is more valuable than a PDF is rare enough that most of them won't have someone with that level of thinking in a decision making role.
> most of them won't have someone with that level of thinking That is an unfair take on it. Come out to the midwest and talk to some of the clerks in the small townships and counties out here. They do know the value of improved data and tech. And they know that investing in better tech can result in a little less money in the bank, which results in less gas to plow the roads, less money to pay someone to mow the ditc…
This isn't meant as shade! I have full respect for people working in those roles. Knowing the difference between a CSV file and a PDF file - and understanding why there are people out there who curse the existence of PDFs and celebrate CSVs - is pretty arcane knowledge.
Also note that I blamed people in "a decision making role" - changing procedures requires buy-in from management. People in management roles are less likely to be thinking about CSVs v.s. PDFs than the people actually executing on the work.
As Derek pointed out in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44320001#44322987 this may often be a vendor limitation - in which case there is a cost factor to consider, and the blame can also be shared between the vendor and the person who made the purchasing decision without understanding the difference between PDF and CSV export.
Re: How OpenElections uses LLMs
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Welcome to government data. One key problem is that the US has tens of thousands of local governments, and each of them get to solve problems in their own way. Digital literacy of the kind that understands why releasing a CSV file is more valuable than a PDF is rare enough that most of them won't have someone with that level of thinking in a decision making role.
> most of them won't have someone with that level of thinking That is an unfair take on it. Come out to the midwest and talk to some of the clerks in the small townships and counties out here. They do know the value of improved data and tech. And they know that investing in better tech can result in a little less money in the bank, which results in less gas to plow the roads, less money to pay someone to mow the ditc…
There's fifty states and almost 4000 counties in the US, not to mention territories. Even if it was only fifty different standards, that's still an overwhelming amount of work and exactly the problem you're replying about.
Re: How OpenElections uses LLMs
#29As the "proper solution" here is of course not using PDFs that are hard-to-parse, but force elections to have machine parseable outputs. And LLMs can "fix in place" stupid solutions.
That's not a hate on the author though. I needed to do some PDF parsing for bank statements before; but also; the proper long-term solution is force banks (by law or by public interest) to have parseable statements, not parse it!
Like putting LLMs to understand bad codebase will not fix the bad codebase, but will build on top of it.
oh well c'est la vie
Re: How OpenElections uses LLMs
#30I was thinking LLMs can be long-term regressive? As the "proper solution" here is of course not using PDFs that are hard-to-parse, but force elections to have machine parseable outputs. And LLMs can "fix in place" stupid solutions. That's not a hate on the author though. I needed to do some PDF parsing for bank statements before; but also; the proper long-term solution is force banks (by law or by public interest) to…