[sudoroom] A call to hackers everywhere

[Matthew Senate]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9Dmt2_QioI

Venezuela uses an electronic device, prints a receipt and counts twice.

It can be done, at least Jimmy Carter thinks so.

But hey, we ain't no Nuclear Scientists, right?

;)

On 11/15/12, Eddan Katz <eddan at eddan.com> wrote:
> Foul play has a long history in elections, and with paper too. But that's a
> different point.
>
> Do you think the voter should receive the paper receipt or that a paper
> receipt is printed out but kept at the voting location. If kept at the
> location, should the voter be able to review the printed copy before it is
> dropped into whatever box or container holds the paper trail votes?
>
> I learned that this turns out to be a crucial question for the blind
> advocates for voting rights, for whom electronic voting machines make it
> possible for them to vote for the first time in private and without any
> assistance. This issue in fact caused a major rift between traditional
> voting rights advocates and the digital rights community that I think is
> still yet to be repaired. Only after intensive coalition building efforts
> did groups like the NAACP, traditionally concerned about voting rights,
> finally came around to the digital rights criticism of EVMs.
>
> I would be interested in trying to work out a more nuanced position that can
> satisfy both the computer scientists and the blind community concerns. That
> seems like a very worthwhile Sudo Room project to me.
>
> -Eddan
>
> On Nov 15, 2012, at 7:26 PM, Jehan Tremback <jehan.tremback at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> IMO, voting should not be done with out a paper trail. Preferably by hand.
>> It's not that hard to color in little bubbles that a computer can read. If
>> the ballots are unclear, then they should be redesigned. If some portion
>> are unreadable by computer, they can be analyzed by humans.
>>
>> It's way too important of a process to be handled by the easily hackable,
>> untested machines, made by members of one party or another. If there is
>> foul play in a paper election, at least there is clear evidence (or
>> evidence of destruction of evidence) to fall back on. With an electronic
>> ballot, there is nothing.
>>
>> -Jehan
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudoroom mailing list
> sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom
>