4 ms·

> If it makes all ballots look alike Ballots aren't physically distinguishable now; what's different? > If the machine is to also verify that you are register

> If it makes all ballots look alike Ballots aren't physically distinguishable now; what's different? > If the machine is to also verify that you are registered to vote No, it would be the same as now. Walk into the polling station, give the nice volunteer your name/ID/whatever, wait your turn to use the next machine. Current machines don't know your identity, neither does this one.

ForHackernews 8y ago
> Ballots aren't physically distinguishable now; what's different? Yeah, they definitely are. People mark them all sorts of ways.
- ygra 8y ago
  I think that referred to the suggestion of printing every ballot after the user selects their choice on the machine.
monocasa 8y ago
> Ballots aren't physically distinguishable now; what's different? Pencil marks are from eachother. That makes stuffing attacks more difficult because it's harder to use automation to create the ballots in the first place without it being obvious.
- pas 8y ago
  There's no need for any sort of automation. Look at the last Russian election, there were a lot of districts where busy hands produced a lot more votes than the number of real people that actually showed up to vote. (Russian voting stations have live video feeds, and Polish journalists sat down to count the number of people who voted, and then compare that to the officially reported votes.) Or the counts could have been simply altered as they were reported. Complaining, reporting would get people an unwanted visit, so why bother?
  - monocasa 8y ago
    I guess my main concern from an election perspective is where no one is sure if the election is legitimate. There's not much you can do for this perspective when people know the election isn't legitimate, but are forced to accept the results for other sociopolitical reasons.
    - pas 8y ago
      What kinds of scenarios can you imagine when enough people call an election's legitimacy into question and somehow machines (and the log files or other data) could resolve it?

ForHackernews 8y ago

> Ballots aren't physically distinguishable now; what's different? Yeah, they definitely are. People mark them all sorts of ways.

ygra 8y ago
I think that referred to the suggestion of printing every ballot after the user selects their choice on the machine.

monocasa 8y ago

> Ballots aren't physically distinguishable now; what's different? Pencil marks are from eachother. That makes stuffing attacks more difficult because it's harder to use automation to create the ballots in the first place without it being obvious.

pas 8y ago
There's no need for any sort of automation. Look at the last Russian election, there were a lot of districts where busy hands produced a lot more votes than the number of real people that actually showed up to vote. (Russian voting stations have live video feeds, and Polish journalists sat down to count the number of people who voted, and then compare that to the officially reported votes.) Or the counts could have been simply altered as they were reported. Complaining, reporting would get people an unwanted visit, so why bother?
- monocasa 8y ago
  I guess my main concern from an election perspective is where no one is sure if the election is legitimate. There's not much you can do for this perspective when people know the election isn't legitimate, but are forced to accept the results for other sociopolitical reasons.
  - pas 8y ago
    What kinds of scenarios can you imagine when enough people call an election's legitimacy into question and somehow machines (and the log files or other data) could resolve it?