Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Seattle-area voters to vote by smartphone in district election

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 197 posts

Re: Seattle-area voters to vote by smartphone in district election

#101

Post by Mirioron »

existencebox wrote: post #73
legitster wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voting without the information packet seems mind boggling to me. But then I realize that's how 99% of the world votes and I understand so much more now.

What has candidly started to scare me, after a good # of years voting with the packet (and I assure you I _research_ far beyond what the packet contains) is the fact that I'm often Still Clueless at the end. A toy example is a recent tax levy for some hospital funding. While the packet contained some thousand-foot information on what it was for and amount/etc, there was NO breakdown as far as I could tell, even onlin…

I wonder if there's some kind of a wisdom-of-the-crowd effect going on. While votes are certainly undermined by political campaigns, I could see it still play an effect.

Re: Seattle-area voters to vote by smartphone in district election

#102

Post by gfodor »

legitster wrote: post #90
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's probably the best voting system, hands down. The disadvantage to this system is the erosion of the secret ballot. Someone ( e.g. an employer, spouse or friend) can now ask you for proof of your vote. (I think absentee ballots should be voidable in person.)

Personally, I have never had this happen nor heard of it happening. Not to say it shouldn't be a concern, but I am reluctant to buy in to the idea based on a complete hypothetical. Needless to say, someone demanding to see my vote counts as a felony still in our state. Maybe it occasionally happens? But it would take thousands of deliberate felonies to meaningfully change an election.

Hypotheticals are valuable when forming policy, because they point directionally to incentives and potential counterfactuals. Nobody has yet had to take arms up against a potential tyrant in the US (claims of the southern states during the civil war aside) but one could argue that the reason such tyranny has never been attempted in the first place is due to the deterrent of the 2nd amendment. Just because we can't point to a concrete example which proves the necessity of the 2nd amendment to prevent such tyranny, doesn't mean it would be a good idea to repeal it on the grounds that we do not know if those hypotheticals would actually manifest. Similarly, having policies for voting which prevent coercion seem sound despite the fact that it's currently unknowable if in the absence of those policies we'd see an electoral impact due to such coercion.

Re: Seattle-area voters to vote by smartphone in district election

#105

Post by filoleg »

tzs wrote: post #19

> King County voters will be able to use their name and birthdate to log in to a Web portal through the Internet browser on their phones, says Bryan Finney, the CEO of Democracy Live, the Seattle-based voting company providing the technology. If they mean that there is a public URL you go to, and then on the site only have to enter you birhdate and name to log in, and then you can vote--that can't be right. There's g…

There is no more than that. The only "extra" thing is that they ask you to draw a signature at the end.

I really do hope this goes nowhere, because this is just silly.

Re: Seattle-area voters to vote by smartphone in district election

#106

Post by filoleg »

cwkoss wrote: post #87

I hope someone hacks the vote to make Mickey Mouse or some other stupid name win. Phone voting is a cybersecurity nightmare.

Why would someone need to do any "hacking", if the only thing needed to vote is name and date of birth. Someone could easily aggregate all that data and write a short python script to do all the voting on everyone else's behalf.

Not advocating for anyone to do so, as this is extremely illegal, but imo whoever signed off on this kind of online voting system is an even bigger criminal in my eyes.

EDIT: upon reading further comments, I discovered that voter registration records in WA are officially public, and they include names and DOB (among other things). I am speechless.

Re: Seattle-area voters to vote by smartphone in district election

#107

Post by filoleg »

sornaensis wrote: post #32
slipheen wrote: post #23

Beyond the security implications (which are huge and ought to be a deal breaker on their own), this seems to have a huge problem in that it's not private. Your abusive spouse/boss/dealer could tell you that they want to see you use the app to vote their way, and there's not much to prevent it. While going to a local precinct is inconvenient, no one knows what you do once you walk in that booth. That's important to av…

How is this different from voting by mail, then? e.g. basically everyone in Oregon votes by mail only.

>How is this different from voting by mail, then?

WA also has vote by mail, but this kind of online voting is very different.

To vote by mail, you have to receive the ballot at your address, physically mark your choices, and then mail it back in. The potential for fraud or abuse of this system is fairly limited.

To vote with this WA online voting system, you need to know the name and the date of birth, that's it. Aside from illegality of voting fraud, the potential for abuse is just humongous, all you need is just a dataset of names and DOB.

Re: Seattle-area voters to vote by smartphone in district election

#108

Post by elhudy »

awb wrote: post #22
sornaensis wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wholeheartedly disagree-- if casting a ballot was as easy as sending a text instead of receiving and then mailing a letter or going to a polling location, I would predict much higher participation. People don't see it worth their time because a single vote really isn't worth anyone's time. Votes only matter as groups! So obviously you have to make it as braindead simple to vote as we have made everything else. What I…

> People don't see it worth their time because a single vote really isn't worth anyone's time. If someone has that worldview I'm OK with them not voting. I'm not sure that X% more participation would improve our collective decision making. In essence we'd be diluting the vote of those who care the most with those who think voting by mail is too hard.

>In essence we'd be diluting the vote of those who care the most with those who think voting by mail is too hard.

I travel a lot. So much so that I am actually flying back to Iowa from the West Coast for 2 days in order to participate in the caucus, and flying out again for work the following day. While I am ok with purchasing a plane ticket to participate, it's understandable that others in my situation, particularly in less important states, would not be ok with incurring that cost. Being able to vote by phone would enable absentee voters who are not always around to participate in their home state's elections.

With that being said I understand I am a fringe case - but those who don't vote because "voting by mail is too hard" are likely a fringe case as well. I'd venture to guess those same people wouldn't vote because "they don't want another app on their phone".

Re: Seattle-area voters to vote by smartphone in district election

#110

Post by will4274 »

Spivak wrote: post #38
legitster wrote: post #33

I want to point out that voting in Washington state is incredibly easy. They mail you a ballot, and a packet with detailed information on every single candidate and issue, and then you can drop your ballot just about anywhere - supermarket, mailbox, probably the street (who knows). It's probably the best voting system, hands down. I don't buy that a smartphone magically hits some convenience threshold that turns out…

I mean it would work for me. I typically vote by mail but if my phone popped a notification that was like "It's election day!" and let me vote it would be done less than 5m after the ping.

How can you vote in less than 5 minutes? For president, sure, but state elections have dozens of people you've never heard of and non-partisan positions and ballot issues. It's only really possible to vote in less than 5 minutes if you're obsessed with state politics or if you're letting somebody else's thinking (either a newspaper or state party) substitute for your own. I think I'd rather you didn't vote.
Post reply on HN