4 ms·

Yes! It seems to me this would be the only sane way to build voting machines, especially.

• orlp 4y ago
  There is no sane way to build voting machines. Voting isn't a technology problem, it's a social/trust problem.
  • dalbasal 4y ago
    Dropping stones in a bucket is "technology," effectively.
    • BVCommander 4y ago
      Paper slips signed by an independent observer and marked with indelible ink can be audited more easily by electoral participants than counting featureless stones in a bucket. They have the added security feature of oily fingerprints containing unique DNA imprinted on them. It's customary in functioning democracies to not sequence fingerprints on a ballot paper, but theoretically it could be done.
  • lb1lf 4y ago
    -That depends on how you use them; this is a people problem, not a tech problem, as you (IMHO) correctly observe. If you use the voting machines to keep a running tally of votes cast so results are available immediately after polls close, you have already gotten a large benefit from them. However, to ensure the (most warranted!) concern of the electorate that the votes are not being tampered with, the machine should also print a receipt to the voter after his/her vote is cast, in a human-readable format, which is then deposited in an urn much like today. So - you get instant results, and if the result is challenged, you can audit the actual ballots rather than just doing a code audit and hoping the numbers haven't been tampered with in some undetectable way.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]