4 ms·
It's terrible to see some of the disinformation that is out there regarding open source software. Time and time again open source is shown to be the way to go,
by mmazing 6y ago
It's terrible to see some of the disinformation that is out there regarding open source software. Time and time again open source is shown to be the way to go, and you still hear lies about how it's not safe.
I can already hear the politicians going on about how "being open source" lets "anyone put their own back door in! BE AFRAID!"
- luxuryballs 6y agoOpen source is good but there would need to also be some way to confirm that the last deployed binary was actually that source code, which with physical access to the machine you could always change. I don’t think computers should be used for this at all.
- chrisco255 6y agoI think it would be acceptable to use digital scanners (themselves running open source code on open source hardware) to count physical ballots, with the caveat that the redacted ballots (personal info removed) are published the day after the election for anyone to count.
- hota_mazi 6y agoThey are not lies. Open source is not safer than closed source, unless you can verify with 100% certainty that the code you saw is the code that's running. And that's impossible. People who think open source is the solution to the voting challenge haven't given this problem much thought.
- akvadrako 6y agoThat's like saying a car is only safer if you can be 100% certain it won't crash.
- mmazing 6y agoI think the main difference is that software being open source (and maintained by a larger community!) provides wider accountability and visibility to code changes, thus reducing potential security flaws. You claim that open source is NOT safer than closed source, what is your reasoning there? Security through obscurity?