4 ms·

Please see my comment below. The author of the piece mis-captioned the photo. This is not an electronic voting proposal. It's simply making the existing mul

by philipn 11y ago

Please see my comment below. The author of the piece mis-captioned the photo. This is not an electronic voting proposal. It's simply making the existing multi-step process that San Francisco uses open-source. For instance, we currently use optical scanning machines here (as do most cities). With this proposal, those machines will run open-source software.

lazaroclapp 11y ago
Isn't optical scanning as hackable as if the votes were originally recorded electronically, though? Or are people performing random checks on the machine's count? (Honestly curious) Don't get me wrong, running open source software is a plus for many reasons, if one is using software at all. But any automation in elections seems to carry a hard to bound amount of risk.
- philipn 11y ago
  Random manual recounts are done on a statistically significant portion of paper ballots. Additionally, paper ballots allow for manual recounts in contested contests (e.g. a legal challenge). E.g. see https://twitter.com/SFElections/status/534405668258594816 https://twitter.com/SFElections/status/534405668258594816 and https://twitter.com/SFElections/status/535541022915186688 https://twitter.com/SFElections/status/535541022915186688
  - stonesixone 11y ago
    And here is a video of the random selection process for last week's election (the two tweets above are from last year): http://sfgov2.org/index.aspx?page=4938 http://sfgov2.org/index.aspx?page=4938 This took place this morning (Tuesday, November 10). I'm the lone member of the public who showed up and rolled the dice the first few times (5:15 into the upper video). :)
    - ossreality 11y ago
      :) That's dorky, in the absolutely most awesome way. I don't know why I keep grinning at your post, it just seems really neat.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]