[Tricks]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Dragon-Dancer Dragon-Dancer:

I would probably be willing to trust it because I have no definitive reason not to.

And I have the opposite problem. I believe people are generally good and fair, but politics does not corrupt absolutely so much as it attracts the corruptable.

"Trust in God. All others pay cash."

Whereas I take it one step further and just don't trust anyone.

[Tricks]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Legal is moot. It's not possible. The Internet was designed to survive a world wide nuclear attack, and the North American part of it is redundant in so many ways as to make it impossible to turn off every entry point. It routes around failures to compensate. And if you did, it would take one guy with a wireless router near the border with the US to breach the 'lockout'. Or a dial up modem.

That's what I figured. So much relies on it they'd never be able to just flip a switch.

[OnTheIce]

Tricks Tricks:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Tricks Tricks:

No, I bank online. I do virtually everything online. But yeah, I'd rather keep it in person for voting because it's more secure and much much much harder to screw with.

Why are we trying to enable the lazy?

I suggest you get out there and volunteer your time during a campaign and see how many people have trouble getting out of their homes or hospital beds to vote.

That's just one example.

It's got little to do with enabling the lazy.

It's about getting more people to vote and allowing those who can't get to a polling station the option to vote.

If you think your paper vote is hard to screw with, you need to spend election day inside a polling station and see what goes on.

Your theory that all is well and perfectly safe with paper voting will be blown out of the water.

It's safer because it's smaller. One polling station getting messed with isn't going to change an election.

If it's for people who are disabled and struggle to get out of their homes or people in hospital beds, then I'm ok with finding an easier way with them to vote. I don't think the internet is the answer to that, but I'm also not sure what is. What worries me is Joe Blow who normally couldn't be bothered to vote cause he doesn't care will vote cause it's easy. Yeah I get that it's his right to vote, and I don't want to deny him that. Think of how many votes the marijuana party would get!

If this were going to be reserved for the disabled, or the ill, and they could find a way to make that work, then cool.

So screwing with democracy a little is ok? When you have elections won and lost by less than 100 votes in some cases, a little hiccup at a polling station CAN change the outcome of the election.

Frankly, this change is targeted at your generation. Generation "Me".....instant gratification and everything on demand.

We've consistently made democracy easier to make it more accessible for everyone.....We've added polling stations....even lazy people that don't want to drive 2 minutes, they can just walk around the corner.

[Tricks]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

So screwing with democracy a little is ok? When you have elections won and lost by less than 100 votes in some cases, a little hiccup at a polling station CAN change the outcome of the election.

Frankly, this change is targeted at your generation. Generation "Me".....instant gratification and everything on demand.

We've consistently made democracy easier to make it more accessible for everyone.....We've added polling stations....even lazy people that don't want to drive 2 minutes, they can just walk around the corner.

My generation is also responsible for Justin Bieber. Our track record sucks right now.

No, obviously messing with democracy a little is not ok. But it getting messed with a little is a lot better than it getting messed with a lot.

[martin14]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Wada Wada:

Could it not be set up so I can go back in and see how I voted, as a check?

If you had that option, there is a record of who you voted for somewhere. Very bad idea. The whole point of the way the paper system is set up is so that no one can ever know who you vote for.

If you leave the voting station with any indication of who you voted for or there is some way to see who you vote for, that is how the brownshirts affected German elections - by bullying people outside polling stations. That is why Canadian elections do not leave any record of a persons' vote. Ever. I've gone to the person running the ballot station, which was inside a school gym, to have the cameras covered in the gym before I would vote.

On line voting, in order to work - must use some form of ID to bring up a 'ballot', and we trust that there is no link between the IDs we use to get the 'online' ballot and the ballot we cast.

With pen and paper, we can see them cross our name off the list. We can see them cross the number of the ballot off the list - and we can see that there is no record between the two. Who gets what ballot is random. We can also see the ballot, that there is no way to differentiate that ballot from any other. We therefore know there is no way to record what an individual chooses on their ballot.

With electonic and internet voting, we have to trust the altruism of the programmers and the companies producing the hardware. However, there are myriad examples of just how these companies cannot be trusted. Like Stalin said, it's who counts the votes who controls the election.

There are open source voting machines, ones where the hardware and software are open for all to see, that can be verified as to how they work and how they protect our confidentiality. But governemnts tend to pick the closed, proprietary systems that cannot be inspected and have proven unreliable in the past.

So my choice is for the Pen and Paper ballot, that we all know works.

Only missed the point, since you vote in a closed booth, you are guaranteed privacy
when you do it.

There is no such guarantee voting online, and as such, who can say that these
votes were cast 'without influence' ?

[OnTheIce]

Tricks Tricks:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

So screwing with democracy a little is ok? When you have elections won and lost by less than 100 votes in some cases, a little hiccup at a polling station CAN change the outcome of the election.

Frankly, this change is targeted at your generation. Generation "Me".....instant gratification and everything on demand.

We've consistently made democracy easier to make it more accessible for everyone.....We've added polling stations....even lazy people that don't want to drive 2 minutes, they can just walk around the corner.

My generation is also responsible for Justin Bieber. Our track record sucks right now.

No, obviously messing with democracy a little is not ok. But it getting messed with a little is a lot better than it getting messed with a lot.

No need to bash on Bieber....I don't know why we love to shit on our home grown talent.

Anyways, when it comes to reality, I'm sure all security issues are dealt with accordingly.

[Tricks]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Tricks Tricks:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

So screwing with democracy a little is ok? When you have elections won and lost by less than 100 votes in some cases, a little hiccup at a polling station CAN change the outcome of the election.

Frankly, this change is targeted at your generation. Generation "Me".....instant gratification and everything on demand.

We've consistently made democracy easier to make it more accessible for everyone.....We've added polling stations....even lazy people that don't want to drive 2 minutes, they can just walk around the corner.

My generation is also responsible for Justin Bieber. Our track record sucks right now.

No, obviously messing with democracy a little is not ok. But it getting messed with a little is a lot better than it getting messed with a lot.

No need to bash on Bieber....I don't know why we love to shit on our home grown talent.

Anyways, when it comes to reality, I'm sure all security issues are dealt with accordingly.

He doesn't identify himself as a Canadian, so we can wash our hands of him

[Brenda]

Tricks Tricks:

My generation is also responsible for Justin Bieber. Our track record sucks right now.

And we will hold that against you till eternity...

[Tricks]

Brenda Brenda:

Tricks Tricks:

My generation is also responsible for Justin Bieber. Our track record sucks right now.

And we will hold that against you till eternity...

It's ok, we got Deadmau5 who more than makes up for it!

[OnTheIce]

Tricks Tricks:

He doesn't identify himself as a Canadian, so we can wash our hands of him

huh?


Everyone knows where he's from....him, nor his management do anything to hide the fact that he's from Canada.

[OnTheIce]

Tricks Tricks:

Brenda Brenda:

Tricks Tricks:

My generation is also responsible for Justin Bieber. Our track record sucks right now.

And we will hold that against you till eternity...

It's ok, we got Deadmau5 who more than makes up for it!

Might as well play crickets....Deadmau5-who?

[BartSimpson]

I've stayed out of this up til now.

Online voting only works *securely* if people can audit how their individual vote was tallied after the fact. If they can't, then this is not a good idea.

This is not that radical an idea.

Right now in California I get a ballot and a receipt with a matching serial number and after an election I can go to the registrar and present my receipt and they have to produce my ballot for my inspection.

That way I can ensure that my vote counted and that it was tallied properly.

If online votes are allowed anonymously then you can count on all sorts of mischief and you won't be able to verify any of it.

We've got problems with absentee paper ballots - such as some counties in Alabama registering more votes for Obama than the counties had residents - and opening up for mischief by Anonymous and 4Chan and MoveOn.org and etc. is just not a wise move.

[Dragon-Dancer]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Dragon-Dancer Dragon-Dancer:

I would probably be willing to trust it because I have no definitive reason not to.

And I have the opposite problem. I believe people are generally good and fair, but politics does not corrupt absolutely so much as it attracts the corruptable.

"Trust in God. All others pay cash."

Perhaps, but in this case I would trusting civil servants and whichever oversight committee will supervise the work not the politicians themselves.

[Dragon-Dancer]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

I've stayed out of this up til now.

Online voting only works *securely* if people can audit how their individual vote was tallied after the fact. If they can't, then this is not a good idea.

This is not that radical an idea.

Right now in California I get a ballot and a receipt with a matching serial number and after an election I can go to the registrar and present my receipt and they have to produce my ballot for my inspection.

That way I can ensure that my vote counted and that it was tallied properly.

If online votes are allowed anonymously then you can count on all sorts of mischief and you won't be able to verify any of it.

We've got problems with absentee paper ballots - such as some counties in Alabama registering more votes for Obama than the counties had residents - and opening up for mischief by Anonymous and 4Chan and MoveOn.org and etc. is just not a wise move.

You could still do something like this by having the system generate a unique serial number at the time of voting that matches the id of the vote record. This would easily allow you to retrieve the same info but without the need for paper.

[DrCaleb]

Dragon-Dancer Dragon-Dancer:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

I've stayed out of this up til now.

Online voting only works *securely* if people can audit how their individual vote was tallied after the fact. If they can't, then this is not a good idea.

This is not that radical an idea.

Right now in California I get a ballot and a receipt with a matching serial number and after an election I can go to the registrar and present my receipt and they have to produce my ballot for my inspection.

That way I can ensure that my vote counted and that it was tallied properly.

If online votes are allowed anonymously then you can count on all sorts of mischief and you won't be able to verify any of it.

We've got problems with absentee paper ballots - such as some counties in Alabama registering more votes for Obama than the counties had residents - and opening up for mischief by Anonymous and 4Chan and MoveOn.org and etc. is just not a wise move.

You could still do something like this by having the system generate a unique serial number at the time of voting that matches the id of the vote record. This would easily allow you to retrieve the same info but without the need for paper.

Look up the word 'Gerrymandering', if you are unfamiliar with it. Now, imagine a world where political parties could look up the identity of everyone who voted for their party. And cross that with Stats Can info, and the info from your in-store rewards card. And that's just the 'nice' scenario I can think of.

I won't trust anyone with my phone number these days, why would I trust someone to recored how I vote?