Articles such as this one are becoming more common and are very disappointing. Open Source is nice to have, but does not make electronic voting secure. Only a voter-verified paper audit trail is sufficient ...https://increment.com/open-source/voting-for-transparency/ …
The article is misleading and dangerous. Verified elections don't depend on verifying the code; it's impossible and irrelevant. The "Operating System" for democracy is people, with their opposing interests, verifying elections with their own eyes, and agreeing on the result.
-
-
OSS may produce public procurement and maintainability benefits, and better usability, and accessibility. But the article's narrative is around transparency and security, and that's irresponsibly a false narrative.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I agree, the article overstates things. People & auditable paper trail are all that is needed. The challenge is that the general public & especially the media want to know the results too quickly. To meet that demand machines are needed; then problems start.
-
Once machines are involved there is the temptation to replace the people, that is a mistake. Machines should be seen as an optimisation that happens in parallel. Then there is the problem of when the machines and people come to a different conclusion.
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.