Heck! Make it a thread, Kster! (e-voting article, at "Wilms" request)

[kster]

Heck! Make it a thread, Kster!

Very cool article.

"If a voting system precludes any notion of a meaningful recount, is cloaked in secrecy and controlled by individuals with conflicts of interest, why would anyone buy it?," Quinn said. "At the very least give citizens the right to choose whether they want to use paper ballots ... thus allowing each elector to be personally satisfied as to the integrity of the process in which they are participating."

Aussies Do It Right: E-Voting


http://www.wired.com/news/ebiz/0,1272,61045,00.html

[SeanQuinn]

1. I thought I was the only Quinn running Linux.

Guess not, goood article.

[Land Shark]

2. ""The fact that the source code ... published really deflected criticism"

Yes, it would deflect criticism. Unfortunately so, in some major ways:

1. Open source would still be subject to many types of attacks,
2. subject to viruses designed for it,
3. would still have a high payoff per successful attack (unlike paper ballots)
4. would still require verification that each and every machine had the code and only the authorized open source code prior to each and every election, but even then would still have all the above risks
5. kind of like the law, which is Open Source in the sense that anybody can read a copy of it, having something be open source doesn't at all mean that an average citizen can understand it, verify it, etc.
6. there's more but that's it for now...

All OPEN SOURCE really does, if it operates perfectly, is eliminate the possibility of rogue code IN THE OPEN SOURCE CODE ITSELF, but doesn't eliminate the possibilty of code being introduced.

INSTEAD: I COME FROM A VALUE, AND THAT VALUE IS SOMETHING LIKE THIS: Each citizen has a right to verify their own vote and to the data, verification, supervision and understanding necessary to verify that they live in a real democracy, without an undue burden.

I think that any type of computerized voting system is beyond the average voter's ability to understand and verify, and therefore puts the security of our system, along with the question of whether we ought to have confidence in it or not, way off into a land that can be simply a "battle of experts" and a fog to the average citizen. The "bad guys' if there are such guys can simply have hired gun experts to obfuscate the issues and obscure the problems of the voting system, and these issues will tend to get nowhere in the public's mind due to their conflicted nature as well as their technical complexity.

Heading down the road of computerized elections is (in the final analysis) simply letting democracy get away from the control of We the People. Do not go gently into that good night.

[kster]

3. I agree, This is what needs to happen

in America...........

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/06/govt_voting/

[Land Shark]

4. Nice link; should be what we are aiming for here: E-voting dumped