Electronic voting machines suck, the comprehensive 2016 election edition

this. electronic transactions are inherently unsafe if you cant trust the code. scantrons incorporate technology in an appropriate way: accelerating counting, not replacing it.

@sfsdfd, it works most of the time for banking for a set of reasons: financial interest, the verified identity of the parties, and the fact all transactions involve three more parties ( woohoo! no, the other kind. ) each party ( the store, the bank, the consumer ) is watching the other closely.

moreover, there is fraud and there are data breeches all the time. it’s part of why credit interest is high, the fraud calculation is built into the system. it’s why you’re more protected when you use credit than directly linking your bank account for transactions. use technology, yes, but try to do so wisely.

fwiw, i personally find it worrisome how freely available something like my medical info is online. itd be better locked off. convenience isnt always best. ( yahoo says maybe actually near a billion accounts have been hacked. speaking of parties ( woohoo! ) someone is having one.

we are not yet to the point where we should give over voting to devices. the hanging chad debacle showed in a mechanical way why we don’t want to trust aging machines built by the likes of diebold. we need graceful fallback, security, privacy ( and on and on ) and nothing, absolutely nothing, has been invented that’s better for that than paper…

yet.

2 Likes