They think they are above the law: the firms who own America's voting system
1–10 of 200 posts
Re: They think they are above the law: the firms who own America's voting system
#2This isn't a complicated problem. State election agencies are underfunded and have to cut corners in order to survive. A simple federal cash infusion would solve 70% of this problem. The other 30% is coming up with sufficient election machine standards.
Re: They think they are above the law: the firms who own America's voting system
#3We could vote on paper for the same people we've been voting for, and we'd still end up with the same problems.
Re: They think they are above the law: the firms who own America's voting system
#4It would be a lot easier to trust an electronic voting system if it was open-source, open-hardware, and votes were recorded on a public blockchain.
Re: They think they are above the law: the firms who own America's voting system
#5It would be a lot easier to trust an electronic voting system if it was open-source, open-hardware, and votes were recorded on a public blockchain.
Voting is one of the very few use-cases I can think of where Blockchain would actually be a valuable and differentiating addition.
Re: They think they are above the law: the firms who own America's voting system
#6This isn't a complicated problem. State election agencies are underfunded and have to cut corners in order to survive. A simple federal cash infusion would solve 70% of this problem. The other 30% is coming up with sufficient election machine standards.
It isn't technically complicated, but it is politically complicated: free and fair elections are not in everyone's interest. The technical problem will continue to persist (or will be reintroduced!) so long as it benefits someone in power to have a broken system in place.
Re: They think they are above the law: the firms who own America's voting system
#7It would be a lot easier to trust an electronic voting system if it was open-source, open-hardware, and votes were recorded on a public blockchain.
Voting is one of the very few use-cases I can think of where Blockchain would actually be a valuable and differentiating addition.
Im a blockchain noob, but if the election was driven by blockchain, how would one protect against Chinese mining warehouses trying to gain control of the network? What would a double spend attack look like? Again, just a blockchain noob asking noob questions
Re: They think they are above the law: the firms who own America's voting system
#8It would be a lot easier to trust an electronic voting system if it was open-source, open-hardware, and votes were recorded on a public blockchain.
But such a system is incompatible with the secret ballot, and is therefore vulnerable to voter coercion.
Didn't vote for the right candidate? You're fired "for performance reasons".
Re: They think they are above the law: the firms who own America's voting system
#9It would be a lot easier to trust an electronic voting system if it was open-source, open-hardware, and votes were recorded on a public blockchain.
But such a system is incompatible with the secret ballot, and is therefore vulnerable to voter coercion. Didn't vote for the right candidate? You're fired "for performance reasons".
The votes can be public but that doesn’t mean the data needs to include information that identifies the voter.
Re: They think they are above the law: the firms who own America's voting system
#10It would be a lot easier to trust an electronic voting system if it was open-source, open-hardware, and votes were recorded on a public blockchain.
Everything is easier with blockchain. A blockchain is a database with virtue.