Our voting system is pathetic.

That’s a common misconception around security in general. Blockchain (or any other method) doesn’t magically make anything more secure. It’s a tool which could play a role in making the wider system more secure but that’ll only ever be as good as every other part of that system and when the system inevitably involves human beings, it will never be great. We could fit my entire home with the best locks, burglar alarms and the like but if I forget to lock the door on my way out, it all becomes fairly pointless.

Most of the issues with elections boil down to human action, be it error or wilful corruption and most of it would have a similar negative impact regardless of the systematic and technological structures put in place. Take voting machines, which do have many aspects to make them better than simple paper ballots but only if they’re used properly. Pretty much all of the problems with them aren’t down to fundamental flaws in the technology though, just people getting it wrong – not updating, maintaining and securing the systems correctly etc. Throw in a complexity like blockchain and I wouldn’t be surprised to see many more errors and issues, outweighing any benefits it might bring.

That’s why I think improving the human aspect is a much higher priority and, given the starting point in the US, offers a lot more relatively easy wins.

 

Correct, that is why I stated that claiming blockchain to be unhackable is not correct. The entry points are the weakest part. Using a blockchain would reduce the number of hands that voting data touches. It reduces the risks that you raise. Also, it would take much more than hiding a couple ballets or trying to insert new data without getting caught. You have actually detailed points of strength for blockchain, but also pointed out general flaws that I have covered in the past. Ultimately, it would not create much more complexities than what already exist. We have these archaic voting machines running on crappy Windows with multiple open access points on them. The security is already paltry at best and the data within these systems are vulnerable to alterations. Blockchain would greatly reduce the possibility of altering data with each voting machine. It would not solve any other issue which needs additional security changes already.

 

That’s the point; the entry points are where all the problems are, either at the point votes are entered in to the system or at the point they’re counted. There’s no fundamental issue with increasing security around the transmission between those two points (and it’d need to be much stronger for any kind of online voting) but that isn’t addressing any immediate issues. If anything, you risk making the system more opaque and thus harder to identify the existing issues.

I think you’re just a couple of steps ahead of yourself. You’re trying to rebuild the house before you’ve put all the fires out.

 

Fully commented and awaiting your response.

 

Well you can't have it both ways saying that fraud doesn't happen because no one could accurately reproduce a signature and then saying that there should be lax comparison standards.

I don't know there are no problems and you would have heard if them or that you beloved Democrats are even looking for them.

Yes I know you love the system. Yes I value the secret ballot. No I dont trust Democrat election officials witness Florida.

 

Which is why - as Honest Joe stated - elections should be conducted by an independent body - one with no horse in the race.

 

Online voting?

You must be joking

In that case the group or country with the best hackers would win every election

 

I have to show ID at the bank every time I request taking a substantial amount of cash out.

Like voting every two years, I don't request cash often enough that they know me by sight.

 

Pretty much what my son is does cyber-security said.

 

I have to show one whenever I check into a hotel, when I get one of my prescriptions, occasionally when I buy alcohol and on and on and on

 

Our machines are quite vulnerable to hacking already. Just look at the links I posted or google DEFCON voting machines hacking.

 

And I answered. You have links to all info in the Oregon system if you really want to know about it. I even pointed out one document that answered your questions/concerns about some election worker seeing your name and how you voted. So if you really want to know, rather than just invent arguments, you will read what I provided. Twenty years with no problems and ranking at the top of all states' voting systems is pretty damned convincing.

 

With Blockchain, there would be no need to count it by hand. We could clearly see what the counts where and even who voted for whom. The tallies could be tabulated by a computer after the election was over, and the election results would be reported by each district. As for the security between the two points, I said in my original post that we can start with paper votes into a machine with blockchain. We can establish biometric verification for each user. It is much more secure than any photo ID that is quite "hackable".

 

Many people are looking for easy answers to dificult questions

 

Just as big of a problem is low information voters.

So uniformed the low information voters are that they shouldn't be voting.
It was low information voters who passed Prop 57 in California where rape or assault with a deadly weapon is no longer a violent crime.

18 year olds voting !!!

The voting age to should be raised to 24 or 26 years of age.

The only political party that benefits from uniformed or low information voters is the Democratic party and extreme radical leftist groups.

 

Democratic party.

 

That's not honest debate. I said much more than a comment on reproduction of a signature.

You don't think we have plenty of Republicans watching very closely? LOL!!!!

So the bottom line is that no matter the proven track record, no matter the evidence found or not found, and no matter the lack of lawsuits and indictments for fraud, you just don't trust anything unless it's Republican controlling it, even though it has been only Republicans who have been caught cheating and artificially, fraudulently boosting the republican vote count. But that shows it's only that vote count that you care about no matter the way it's obtained. You concern is not fairness.

 

Age does not equal informed voter. I have seen plenty of older uninformed voters. Our democracy was built on not requiring informed voting, and there has be a negative history associated with requiring "informed" voters.

 

Maybe, but as you posted that uniformed voters are more dangerous. There are many more uniformed Republican voters.

 

Who is really informed ?

Are you?

There are a thousand issues swirling around in the public square with thousands more that are not even on the radar screen

Average republican voters are just as informed as average democrat or libertarian voters

 

That true, I saw women in their 50's supporting Bernie.

Have your political views changed over the years compared to when you were 18 years old ?

 

And your source for that claim ?

 

Who has ever done a thorough investigation and examination?

"......The most important argument against mail elections is the fact that an examination of voter fraud cases over the past two decades reveals that absentee ballots (i.e., ballots requested and sent through the mail) are vote thieves’ tool of choice. It is often also suggested that voting by mail will increase voter turnout; however, the evidence on turnout and mail elections leads to the exact opposite conclusion.....

.....Thus, there will be thousands of blank absentee ballots arriving in the mail that individuals will use to cast bogus ballots. For example, in 2000, a survey of just one county in Oregon reported that about 5 percent of residents admitted that other people marked their ballots and 2.4 percent admitted that other people signed their ballot envelopes. The professor who conducted the study suspected that the real numbers were higher since most people are reluctant to admit being a party to a crime.[7]"
https://www.heritage.org/election-i...il-terrible-idea-whose-time-should-never-come

So bottom line is I have no problem with and prefer going to my polling place, filling out my ballot and hand placing it in the scanner recording my vote and keeping my ballot out of the hands of anyone else. And again you rely on the signature on the outside of the envelope to insure the person who filled out the ballot is the person registered but want lax matching standards. Kinda defeats the purpose and opens the door for fraudulent ballots.

Can you cite any Republican controlled counties where we are seeing the problems, for the second time, in Broward and Palm counties?

 

They are complaining in Broward that the Governor's race was at the top of the ballot and the Senators race was at the bottom and 25,000 people didn't vote for Senator because they didn't see it.

So they were so uninformed they didn't know there was a race for Senator and didn't wonder where it was on the ballot and why they didn't get to vote for a Senator?

And we should be glad they voted?

 

I was just stating opinion as you did with saying the Democrats are dysfunctional.