5 ms·

Opt out (with opt outs and straw polls used to determine if an audit is necessary). I hear this again and again and again and its utter bullshit. You don't ne

Opt out (with opt outs and straw polls used to determine if an audit is necessary). I hear this again and again and again and its utter bullshit. You don't need to solve auditing to solve online voting. They are two separate issues and I guarantee once you HAVE online voting there will be no shortage of solutions to audit it.

ddingus 10y ago
No, this is a basic trust issue. More in a bit...
ddingus 10y ago
The trust issue comes down to the voter understanding their vote intent contributes to the tally. When the voter expresses this on a physical ballot, that chain of trust is intact. They know the record of their vote is accurate. Audits of this, taking the vote to court, etc... is all possible. Machine assists work well from there, and do not generally present a problem. Oregon and other states do this with vote by mail. It works, and electronic means help with registration, and the state does auto registration too. Changes, ballot tracking, validation, party registration are all super easy and robust. When we move that vote to a machine captured intent, the voter lacks that chain of trust. They cannot know their vote contributed to the tally, unless votes are personally identifiable somehow. Bringing records into court, etc... are all problematic as well. That chain of trust is foundational to the overall validity of the process. We don't really need e voting. What we do need is improved focus on transparent, efficient, trustworthy processes.
- progressive_dad 10y ago
  You can mail your registration. That's why 2.5 million newly registered voters via voteforchange.org suddenly appeared swinging North Carolina single handedly in 2008. An electronic registration/ballot can be accessed 24/7 doesn't get lost or destroyed, and makes young voters more comfortable. It can be designed/redesigned more easily, A/B tested, and made as simple and accessible as possible for the most number of people. It matters.
  - ddingus 10y ago
    Heh... Oregon has all its voters registered. Easy peasy. It is untrustworthy sorry. Oregon is really simple, turnout great, registration automatic, etc... Things like A/B testing aren't needed, and most importantly, the voter knows the actual record of their vote contributes to the tally. Every voter gets all they need, and ample time to vote as well. Unless we want personally identifiable votes, the system you describe cannot do that in a trustworthy way. And having that trust in the record be true matters a whole lot more. This matter isn't bullshit. Having that basic trust in place is at the core of democracy. Participation does not require surrendering that trust either. That is solved by actually educating people and not putting things in their way. The Oregon system does both those things. Outreach and education comes from parents and concerned others, until they come of age, at which point the State does this. We don't need e voting. It's a solution in search of a problem. Most of our systems are very corrupt and voter hostile. It is very tempting to apply technology to circumvent that. But, the truth is that same corruption will take advantage of the lack of trust and forced ambiguity inherent in electronic voting records that are not personally identifiable. We have already seen this happen here in the US and other parts of the world. Voter trust in the actual record of their vote used for the tally is fundemental to trustworthy elections.
ddingus 10y ago
We can and need and should do the basic work needed to operate our democracy in an inclusive, trustworthy way. Cost is not a factor in this. It never is, unless hostile interests are successful in making it an issue. They have done so, and untrustworthy election processes dominate US elections too. E voting does nothing to resolve what is a human corruption problem.

ddingus 10y ago

No, this is a basic trust issue. More in a bit...

ddingus 10y ago

The trust issue comes down to the voter understanding their vote intent contributes to the tally. When the voter expresses this on a physical ballot, that chain of trust is intact. They know the record of their vote is accurate. Audits of this, taking the vote to court, etc... is all possible. Machine assists work well from there, and do not generally present a problem. Oregon and other states do this with vote by mail. It works, and electronic means help with registration, and the state does auto registration too. Changes, ballot tracking, validation, party registration are all super easy and robust. When we move that vote to a machine captured intent, the voter lacks that chain of trust. They cannot know their vote contributed to the tally, unless votes are personally identifiable somehow. Bringing records into court, etc... are all problematic as well. That chain of trust is foundational to the overall validity of the process. We don't really need e voting. What we do need is improved focus on transparent, efficient, trustworthy processes.

progressive_dad 10y ago
You can mail your registration. That's why 2.5 million newly registered voters via voteforchange.org suddenly appeared swinging North Carolina single handedly in 2008. An electronic registration/ballot can be accessed 24/7 doesn't get lost or destroyed, and makes young voters more comfortable. It can be designed/redesigned more easily, A/B tested, and made as simple and accessible as possible for the most number of people. It matters.
- ddingus 10y ago
  Heh... Oregon has all its voters registered. Easy peasy. It is untrustworthy sorry. Oregon is really simple, turnout great, registration automatic, etc... Things like A/B testing aren't needed, and most importantly, the voter knows the actual record of their vote contributes to the tally. Every voter gets all they need, and ample time to vote as well. Unless we want personally identifiable votes, the system you describe cannot do that in a trustworthy way. And having that trust in the record be true matters a whole lot more. This matter isn't bullshit. Having that basic trust in place is at the core of democracy. Participation does not require surrendering that trust either. That is solved by actually educating people and not putting things in their way. The Oregon system does both those things. Outreach and education comes from parents and concerned others, until they come of age, at which point the State does this. We don't need e voting. It's a solution in search of a problem. Most of our systems are very corrupt and voter hostile. It is very tempting to apply technology to circumvent that. But, the truth is that same corruption will take advantage of the lack of trust and forced ambiguity inherent in electronic voting records that are not personally identifiable. We have already seen this happen here in the US and other parts of the world. Voter trust in the actual record of their vote used for the tally is fundemental to trustworthy elections.

ddingus 10y ago

We can and need and should do the basic work needed to operate our democracy in an inclusive, trustworthy way. Cost is not a factor in this. It never is, unless hostile interests are successful in making it an issue. They have done so, and untrustworthy election processes dominate US elections too. E voting does nothing to resolve what is a human corruption problem.