[hackerspaces] A call to all hackerspaces

[Will Bradley]

The light-source (I.e. digital hand-raising) method is intriguing because it
feels so much better... we've worked out the mechanics of hand-raising over
centuries and the wonderful thing is you can't spoof bodies, only hands. It
also takes seconds to get a result, and each individual can get a sense of
the overall count leading to extreme transparency.

If you want to eliminate voter fraud without compromising anonymity, some
new Middle Eastern democracies have also marked people's hands with colored
ink that's hard to wash off. No identification necessary.

Technology is promising but is increasingly being used to undermine the
populace instead of empower it. If you had a BitVote app on your phone,
who's to say it, your phone, or the architecture hasn't been compromised? I
feel like it's much harder for a government to rig a show of hands than for
it to install software on a majority of electronic devices.

Finally, it's a small point, but try not to create a technocracy where only
those with an operable (or five) are given a vote. Democracy shouldn't have
minimum system requirements ;)
On Oct 18, 2011 6:14 PM, "Todd" <todd at cruxtech.net> wrote:

> I actually think I may go with iris recognition, thank you for mentioning
> that Dan, it will solve a lot of problems at once. I don't think anyone
> would care about taking a pic of their iris and it guarantees no duplicates.
> and I can just take the data strait from the iris reader and put it's md5 in
> the database.
>
> So I guess what I am asking for then, and this is the craziest thing I have
> ever said but.
> An addon for drupal that adds a column to the users database that has a md5
> hash of their iris.
> and then a way to require personal pins for voting  in drupal.
>
> On 10/18/2011 2:56 PM, Jesse Sanford wrote:
>
>> I like this. Using bitcoin as an example would make it easy to control
>> the distribution of tokens within the economy at any time as well.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:49 PM, mike iannacone
>> <mike.iannacone at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:30 PM, R. Mark Adams, PhD
>>> <rmadams at epotential.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> What about leveraging the work that has gone into cryptographic cash? It
>>>> seems like that is a way to ensure that any givetoken, once issued, can
>>>> be
>>>> used only once...
>>>>
>>> and doing it that way should also be independently auditable, assuming
>>> that each ballot-option gets its own account where the coins are
>>> spent, and that coins cannot be forged.  (and both of these seem very
>>> reasonable to assume.)
>>>
>>> The only remaining problem then would be generating and distributing
>>> the tokens, and ensuring that whoever is generating them is not making
>>> extra for themselves.  But those problems are probably inherent to all
>>> other systems as well, and probably solvable by making sure that
>>> process is very transparent.
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/**mailman/listinfo/discuss<http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>>>
>>>  ______________________________**_________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/**mailman/listinfo/discuss<http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/**mailman/listinfo/discuss<http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20111018/d84b91f3/attachment.html>