More important it should be a right first. Where i live it's not optional
Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections
11–20 of 532 posts
Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections
#12The most important feature of public elections is trust. Efficiency is one of the least important feature. When we moved away from paper voting with public oversight of counting to electronic voting we significantly deteriorated trust, we made it significantly easier for a hostile government to fake votes, all for marginal improvements in efficiency which don't actually matter. Moving to internet voting will further…
Porque no los dos?
Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections
#13I believe the piece we're missing is the government (citizen?) service which issues (manages, replaces, revokes) constituents' cryptographic tokens for use with such things. Then our voting systems could be electronic, secure, open, verifiable, and mostly private; assuming effective oversight / this organization does not issue fraudulent tokens or leak keys or identities (big assumption, but I don't think it's imposs…
Isn't a vote being verifiably tied to a person actually a bad thing? Then you can actually check what e.g. your wife or kids voted for and punish them if they vote wrong. Or get people to pay for votes, but doing that at scale is obviously hard.
Maybe this isn't what you meant by verifiable, but there are systems with this property and they are bad.
Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections
#14I believe the piece we're missing is the government (citizen?) service which issues (manages, replaces, revokes) constituents' cryptographic tokens for use with such things. Then our voting systems could be electronic, secure, open, verifiable, and mostly private; assuming effective oversight / this organization does not issue fraudulent tokens or leak keys or identities (big assumption, but I don't think it's imposs…
Yeah, we have certificates on our ID cards, but they need to be manually renewed every 3 years which necessitates a trip to the designated authority. And then the underlying system gets changed every so often invalidating the card types altogether, so they can be used as dummy IDs only.
Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections
#15* “all your money lives on the internet and it’s safe”
* “internet voting is insecure”
who wins?
Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections
#16So where is the thought on mail in these days? It’s what we have in Washington and I rather like it.
Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections
#17You know, kind of an interesting test here. This was posted 13 minutes ago and the comments so far are mostly all supportive of not wanting internet/insecure voting methods, all supportive of pen and paper. I wonder if after an hour or two the propaganda hoses will have been turned on and all the top comments start to have the reverse messaging in them, saying internet voting is perfectly fine, and such initial comme…
Whose bots are fastest?
Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections
#18The most important feature of public elections is trust. Efficiency is one of the least important feature. When we moved away from paper voting with public oversight of counting to electronic voting we significantly deteriorated trust, we made it significantly easier for a hostile government to fake votes, all for marginal improvements in efficiency which don't actually matter. Moving to internet voting will further…
What if some level of efficiency (not necessarily internet) improves turnout and participation?
Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections
#19Estonians seem to have funny ideas on this. They're very VERY digital-forward.
And their system has the same problems as all the others: https://estoniaevoting.org/
Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections
#20paper & pen has tremendous value as a recording mechanism. Although it's slower at counting and indexing, it is far better at reproducibility and durability:
* records last > 500 years with no electricity . corruption is obvious at first glance. ( bad records don't appear to be good).
* counting is easily distributed by number of workers
* readily visually inspected with no special tools . ideal for auditing
* records stay in order at rest.
* easy to detect & protect against tampering
* easy to train new users . CRUD tooling costs pennies per operator
* cheaper to scale writes & reads
TCO and risk-assessment for paper records exceeds digital on nearly every measure.