November 19, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Timothy Beight (11/19/2008)
The electronic voting machines we use here in Amherst, OH (west of Cleveland) tally electronically, but also literally print your selections on a paper tape that is captive in the machine, but visible behind a clear window for each voter to read and verify before finalizing the voting "transaction." The voter cannot walk away with the paper, but it is available to the Board of Elections if needed in a recount. It seems like a good compromise.
I heard that people in Ohio in Indiana were waiting up to 6 hours in early voting. At least in some places they let you take a number and gave you an estimated return time so you didn't have to stand on line the whole time.
A paper trail is needed but not foolproof. Someone clever enough to hack the system may be able to show you your choices on a ballot card while sending their choices to the database. Having said that, conceptually speaking, electronic voting is something that makes great sense to me. And it's the type of work we do. It's a challenge that the IT community (us) as a whole needs to get right.
November 19, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Here in Australia we have a paper based voting system. You just put numbers in the boxes in the order of your preference. The long lines I saw american voters waiting in mystified me. We never have to wait more than 5 or 10 minutes, and we have compulsory voting too which means the turnout is always 95% plus. Our preferential voting system also avoids the problem of the vote being split between multiple small parties. The results are always confirmed within a day or so of the vote.
November 19, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Sorry for the late note.
Seeing the paper result, but not holding it is interesting. And it's a good compromise, perhaps the best we'll ever get.
I read in one place that the reason they can't let you take a record or receipt is that people have been "paid" for votes if they bring in a receipt. Same reason you can't print one at home and send it in. The mail in is different because it's not "recorded" until you mail it in. If you could print some bar code, then you can't necessarily verify it.
I think advance voting, as happened this year, is part of the solution. The other is a paper receipt of some sort you can see and verify.
November 19, 2008 at 11:36 pm
In Malta we have a paper vote. Our election is different however as we vote for candidates giving numbers 1 being first preference etc.
So you can vote for all the candidates if you want.
Visit:
http://www.kaizenlog.com
http://www.autocar-live.com
http://www.yachting-live.com
November 20, 2008 at 4:13 am
I watched a video on cryptography and voting from googletalks that applies to this discussion. The speaker, Ben Adida from Harvard, explains a system that provides the voter verification of their vote, verification it was counted and maintains secrecy of the ballot.
November 20, 2008 at 10:54 am
Dream Weaver (11/19/2008)
No one so far has mentioned that electronic voting system sold has been proven to be easily compromised on location. A handful of people posing as voters can compromise the votes of an entire precinct in a short time. They can then move on to another nearby precinct and do the same thing, since they don't have to prove their identity (just state a name that is on the precinct list, which is easily done with a bit of geographic research)....
This is not true. We have to either show the voter pamphlet with the name of the polling place and our names, or show a Driver's License, Passport, or utility bill for the address with our name on it.
November 20, 2008 at 11:03 am
Steve Jones - Editor (11/19/2008)
Sorry for the late note.Seeing the paper result, but not holding it is interesting. And it's a good compromise, perhaps the best we'll ever get.
I read in one place that the reason they can't let you take a record or receipt is that people have been "paid" for votes if they bring in a receipt. Same reason you can't print one at home and send it in. The mail in is different because it's not "recorded" until you mail it in. If you could print some bar code, then you can't necessarily verify it.
I think advance voting, as happened this year, is part of the solution. The other is a paper receipt of some sort you can see and verify.
Heh heh...there's always the "I Voted" sticker they hand out.
Gaby________________________________________________________________"In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not." - Albert Einstein
November 20, 2008 at 12:43 pm
jpowers (11/20/2008)
Dream Weaver (11/19/2008)
No one so far has mentioned that electronic voting system sold has been proven to be easily compromised on location. A handful of people posing as voters can compromise the votes of an entire precinct in a short time. They can then move on to another nearby precinct and do the same thing, since they don't have to prove their identity (just state a name that is on the precinct list, which is easily done with a bit of geographic research)....
This is not true. We have to either show the voter pamphlet with the name of the polling place and our names, or show a Driver's License, Passport, or utility bill for the address with our name on it.
Apparently standards differ in different locations. I've lived in two U.S. states, and in both cases you had to prove your identity (using methods similar to above) in order to REGISTER, but voting was a simple as walking up, saying your name, verbally confirming that you live at the address shown, sign, and vote.
November 20, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Dream Weaver (11/20/2008)
jpowers (11/20/2008)
Dream Weaver (11/19/2008)
No one so far has mentioned that electronic voting system sold has been proven to be easily compromised on location. A handful of people posing as voters can compromise the votes of an entire precinct in a short time. They can then move on to another nearby precinct and do the same thing, since they don't have to prove their identity (just state a name that is on the precinct list, which is easily done with a bit of geographic research)....
This is not true. We have to either show the voter pamphlet with the name of the polling place and our names, or show a Driver's License, Passport, or utility bill for the address with our name on it.
Apparently standards differ in different locations. I've lived in two U.S. states, and in both cases you had to prove your identity (using methods similar to above) in order to REGISTER, but voting was a simple as walking up, saying your name, verbally confirming that you live at the address shown, sign, and vote.
That's the way it used to be, but a few years ago some people raised a big stink about a chance that illegal aliens might be voting so now you have to show ID.
November 20, 2008 at 3:47 pm
After years of voting in small-town NH where at least one of the election volunteers knew you so you did not need to prove who you were or where you lived, it was a change for me to have to show identification at the polls where I voted in Florida. I think you are supposed to show ID anywhere, that doesn't mean that everyone does.
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
November 22, 2008 at 7:03 pm
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDnShu5V99s
Excellent talk. Thanks so much! My naive idea does not address coercion.
Cheers!
David
November 24, 2008 at 7:25 am
I am enthused to know intelligent people are exploring technical solutions to the voting system. I hope they can explain the system to the average voter and build confidence in the system.
November 24, 2008 at 10:49 am
Interesting video, thanks for posting.
Viewing 13 posts - 31 through 42 (of 42 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply