• TVgog56789@lemy.lolOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Blockchain technology based (BBVS) could be safer but regular EVMs are still hackable

      Trustless systems are always better than centralised systems especially when the government in power is also in authority to decide whether they continue to stay in power.

      US has been blessed till now.

      But look at Russian or North Korean elections. They also use paper ballots

      I am confident that Putin is not gonna last if they go for a blockchain based voting system.

      • NateNate60@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        The problem is not being secure; it is convincing people that it is secure. Even the stupidest person understands that marking off a paper in a booth and then depositing it in a locked box is secure. The voting method must give voters confidence that their vote was counted, the election was fair, and the results are legitimate.

        • TVgog56789@lemy.lolOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          That gives so much more opportunity for human intervention.

          A good locksmith is all it takes to manipulate the votes.

          Even if you keep it under tight security and surveillance they can bribe the security.

          • NateNate60@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            In many countries there is a security camera placed over the ballot box which is livestreamed to the Internet

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            In my state, here’s how it works:

            1. Receive ballot by mail
            2. Drop ballot off at a drop box
            3. Wait a few days
            4. Check online that it was received and the signature is accepted
            5. Check on election day that the vote was counted

            To break that system, you’d need to also hack the website or manipulate the votes on election day. That’s a lot harder than manipulating proprietary software by bribing a software engineer somewhere.

            • zazo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              In my country here’s how it works:

              1. Parties provides free food and transport to unemployed masses they know will vote for them
              2. Wait 3-4 hours in queue at polling station to receive ballot in person
              3. Drop ballot in secure box
              4. Go back to work for a few days
              5. See on election day that the party that spent the most on voter courting wins

              How would you propose we deal with this when people who are working (and can’t take a day off to go vote) would come out in much smaller numbers than ones that have nothing else to do (and get free lunch and transit to and from the polling stations) and even when voting happens on a weekend you have to trade your only time off to go and vote out of the goodness of your heart.

              I think this is one of the reasons for digital voting - I’d much rather be able to vote from work or home or anywhere when I don’t have the time to sit on a queue for 5 hours just to have my vote diminished by a group that isn’t politically active but loves a free lunch and something to do

              • TVgog56789@lemy.lolOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                I am not in favour of EVMs here.

                However there are pros and cons for both systems

                I am just saying if you go for an electronic voting system using an airtight blockchain like Bitcoin and ethereum to verify votes using a biometric database is the only system trustworthy enough because.

                If you use multiple blockchains like these it would require 10 trillion dollars or more to get the computing and staking power to hack the system.

                It’s inconceivably costlier than hacking a physical election.

                Russia also has paper ballots and I can assure you we can easily kick out Putin with a blockchain based voting system.

  • Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Reminder that this fucking moron is pushing Twitter as a financial tool. He wants you to use X like you would use your credit card.

    But voting machines are insecure?

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      He wants you to use X like you would use your credit card.

      I won’t even use xitter like social media. Why in hell would I consider it as a credit card? Oh, I get it. The target audience is the idiot army.

  • blackstampede@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I agree. While we’re at it, we can also make election day a holiday and require employers to give workers at least a paid half-day off so that they can vote, and create a citizenship ID that is free and easy to get rather than using ID with requirements like a driver’s license. Then maybe we can try out ranked choice voting and eliminate the electoral college. You know, since we want the election to be fair.

  • BaldDude@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Well, he’s got that one right.

    Elections should be as low tech as possible. Everything going on should be verifiable with your eyes and basic tools only.

    Keep it simple and keep it monitored by at least 3 to 5 people at all times.

    who cares if the counting takes a few days, as long as i can trust the results.

    And dear fellows in the USA, for the love of god, move the voting day to a Sunday already.

    • uis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      who cares if the counting takes a few days, as long as i can trust the results.

      I’ve never heard of in-person stations counting for longer than 6 hours.

      move the voting day to a Sunday already.

      It isn’t already? Then USA gets “worse than Russia” award again.

      • BaldDude@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Very Interesting, thanks!

        Still I’m not sure if I would trust that system more than a handcount with at least six eyes present at all times.

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Counterpoint: There’s a big difference between electronic voting machines and electronic counting machines.

      The way we do elections in Canada, your vote is made on paper. The paper ballots are fed though electronic counting machines to get the initial tally, but the paper record is then kept and tallied up separately to check for discrepancies. This is both fast and secure.

      Electronic voting machines, on the other hand, are an exercise in absolute insanity that security experts universally agree no one should be using.

      Of course, Musk is railing against them because he’s drunk the far right Kool-Aid about stolen elections, but actual smart, educated people have been saying the same thing for a lot longer.

      • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        In a smaller local election a few cycles back, I got to trial a paper backed electronic voting machine they were testing out for people who have dexterity or vision problems.

        You basically got the same paper ballot as everyone else, but then you slipped it into the machine and it colored the bubbles for you after you selected the option on the screen.
        Then you took your piece of paper out and handled it like a ballot filled in by hand.

        Wasn’t networked and didn’t see anything that could tie you to a vote.
        I got to share my appreciation for the concept, but concern about difficulty verifying it filled things out correctly, and the potential for touch screens to be difficult to use or act funny, all the difficulties of ux work to handle fixing an error, and the need for the UI to be exceptionally clear, which was difficult on the smaller screen with the larger font.
        I think it also has screen reader support, but I didn’t use it, so I’m not sure.