What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Missed out on the best electronic deals last Black Friday? view!
newegg.com - Newegg.com's Cyber Monday Promotion has you covered. No Lines, No Crowds; Just Click and Save.
60 Comments
- MacBookForMe, on 10/26/2009, -8/+28Sadly, nothing could save democracy any more...
- elanthedon, on 10/27/2009, -3/+22Democracy? We haven't been a democracy in ages
- drGt1987, on 10/27/2009, -4/+21Can social networks bring us Socialism?
- BillyB, on 10/26/2009, -2/+18Its worth a shot. Nothing else has been working that well.
- sanskrtam, on 10/27/2009, -1/+14Can proxy and anonymity bring us anarchism?
- Nodaki, on 10/27/2009, -2/+11Article should have been titled "Can open source software create more competition in the voting machine market?" Answer is Yes.
The title "Can open source save democracy?" No and democracy does not need to be saved but re-examined. - fwertz, on 10/27/2009, -1/+9Feels like oligarchy.
- Stradenko, on 10/27/2009, -0/+8"The possibility that a widespread glitch could affect a close national election, and the potential for this to undermine democracy, cannot be overstated."
Sure it can:
The possibility that a widespread glitch could affect a close national election, and the potential for this to undermine democracy exceeds a Probability of 1. - angryfirelord, on 10/27/2009, -5/+11We are a Republic, not a Democracy.
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3388 - aladrin, on 10/27/2009, -0/+6Programmers don't deliver the results. It's still pitifully easy to rig an election, even with Open Source software.
- Snoogs, on 10/27/2009, -0/+6With thousands of programmers checking each other's work, there won't be any loopholes or back doors, and votes will be instant and accurately counted... if it's open source, vote count will be public domain.
- aladrin, on 10/27/2009, -3/+8We're both. Try actually looking up the definitions of words instead of believing whatever you read in a blog or newspaper.
- Langford, on 10/27/2009, -0/+5Open source voting software should make people feel better, rightfully so, but by it's self isn't the end all solution. It still needs to include a log transcribed onto something that is tamper resistant, like paper.
- crazyhorse13, on 10/27/2009, -0/+4We haven't been a democracy EVER. Not since we became a country, anyways.
Come on, people. Constitutional Republic. - NiftyG, on 10/27/2009, -2/+6Open source or not, voting machines cannot save democracy from vote fraud. Whenever all the votes are in one place and under the control of a handful of computer technicians, there will be an opportunity to change a lot of votes very quickly.
The best way to avoid fraud is to distribute the load among a large number of people. In other words, have groups of people hand count the ballots. This way, you have hundreds (or thousands) of eyewitnesses to the vote count and any one individual cannot affect more than a small percentage of the ballots. - InJectaH, on 10/27/2009, -2/+5Will this help voters to not vote for a candidate based on their skin tone?
- InactiveUser, on 10/27/2009, -0/+3It is and it is getting worse.
Everything is equal until you are part of corporation, they are calling the shots now in almost every country. - rancemo, on 10/27/2009, -0/+3"We" aren't anything -- speak for yourself. I am a sovereign individual. None of those people represent me, nor do they follow a constitution. If only I could get them to stop stealing my money and threatening me.
- ElSnuggles, on 10/27/2009, -1/+4Open Source will not save democracy (or our Republic) but its a good start. Closed systems built by private corporations are entirely too "open" to manipulation whether intentional or accidental. Now if we can only get the citizens to start paying attention and staying abreast on news for themselves instead of listening to intentionally biased commentary one way or another that is controlled by corporate interests. =/
- InactiveUser, on 10/27/2009, -1/+4Nothing is tamper resistant, even paper - r.e Afghanistan.
It comes down to the people that are selected. Crooks are crooks and where there is money and power there are crooks. - HamNCheese, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2How are we both exactly?
We elect officials who vote on issues brought in front of our government. We fit the definition of a republic at every level. - fuzzynyanko, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2I have a better idea: don't use products that don't work
- Langford, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2Nothing can be tamper proof, but they can be tamper resistant. The best we can hope for is to jockey from a costs vs rewards perspective. At the very least, paper trails give us a place to start investigating possible problems.
- inactive, on 10/27/2009, -1/+3Are you people really this naive?? It has NOTHING to do with the voting machines or the software...it has everything to do with who wins.
When the Looters(the Democrats) win, the voting machines are a complete non-issue, because the Republicans are adults, so they know how to lose with grace.
It's only when the Republicans win that the machines and software become an issue because the Looters are nothing but a bunch of adult adolescents who throw a temper tantrum when they lose, just like a spoiled child. - goffy59, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1We are a representative democracy, aka a republic. I agree that open source can help with the process.
- NiftyG, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1The software may be as secure as we can possibly make it, but when the votes are counted in a computer, there will always be a point where all the votes are in one place under the control of a few individuals. That's the point where any holes, defects, or opportunities will be exploited because It's much easier to corrupt a few people than a few hundred.
Best thing to do is to never trust the counting to a few people and a computer. When you have hundreds or thousands of real people counting the votes, the counting is distributed and the system is inherently safer. - VitriolAndAngst, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1This will never work.
There is no highly paid feedback loop for the Politicos in power to pay the Voting Machine company more and more money to continue to rig the election in a plausible way.
Without an open source back door to change the vote -- the Politicians will never trust an application that might risk their system to the threat of an actual Democracy. Corporations need to be sure that the people they buy stay bought. - finewine, on 10/30/2009, -0/+1False sense of security. Just because the software used in the machines was open source, doesn't mean you will get to see if the software installed on machine B is the same exact source code you're given access to.
Would it be better? Yes. Is it a solution? No.
. - Hercules, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1This is a case where open source makes very good sense.
That said, I don't think it's generally ever a 'bad' idea either, but it has limited benefits if the community isn't that big around the software. - KingOfAwesome, on 10/27/2009, -1/+2But why would you want to save it? Democracy is inherently flawed because people will naturally vote on self-interest rather than what's better for society as a whole, and this translates into people voting for representatives that will give them something for nothing. To meet this demand, representatives will have to tax, borrow and inflate the currency, thereby increasing the time preference of people more and more, which is very detrimental to civilization.
- khfn, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1I have a feeling you've been waiting a while to put that in a thread =)
- khfn, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1"glitch" ...heh, trying to keep things politically correct I see.
- Lonandubh, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1Nice reference!
- Frixionburne, on 10/27/2009, -1/+2Err.... But votes aren't accurately counted now, and the issue isn't technological error, its human intentions. The Electoral College is annoying, especially seeing as how it makes your right to vote relatively useless. Mind you I'm not including local issues in the voting mix, just national.
- Snoogs, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1DIAF
- ldl67, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1I love how good ol' paper isn't an option...
- Lonandubh, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1Constitutional Democratic Republic
- grasshoppir, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1or just like you
- crazyhorse13, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usa
When was the last time you voted for something that wasn't a representative? - Atomic1fire, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1Sadly, unless the results are automatically posted to everywhere within seconds, they can be changed or ignored.
and even if the election was perfect,
there will still be those who say RECOUNT, FLORIDA HAD ISSUES - kolobcreek, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1I guess it could but only if the right person got their hands on it. Then used their source access to hack the system and rig the election so that an Constitutionalist, Libertarian, Child under the age of 6 or a trained chimpanzee won the election.
Personally I would go for the trained chimpanzee or perhaps bill and hillary. - Lonandubh, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1@HaNCheese: Because a modern republic is a Form of democracy: representative democracy. Previous forms of the republic did not allow for the citizens to choose who represented them.
- roodammy44, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1So where does this accurate data go?
If it immediately goes out to a range of different addresses all over the world so it can be independently verified by all, fair enough.
If it goes to a voting organisation, there has to be a lot of trust in that organisation. At the moment it goes to a private corporation who have connections with the Bush family....... - MyTurboTraffic, on 10/27/2009, -2/+3I still have hope. This to me is still the greatest country on the planet and I really hope that as a whole we can all come together as "The People" and make positive changes in our short and long term future. I agree though 100% that it doesn't look good.
- somberwolf, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1@HamNCheese & angryfirelord : We are actually a Democratic Republic. Like you said HNC, "we elect officials." That is the democracy part. The republic part is where those elected officials "represent" us, and vote on issues for us. To say, "we are a Republic, not a Democracy" is simply incorrect. But it would also be wrong to say, "we are a Democracy not a Republic." Our system is a marriage of the two forms.
- AndreiSavin, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1Democracy is a dictature by the majority.
- sembetu, on 10/27/2009, -1/+2Democracy?
No, I think we have been thrown full on into Idiocracy.
It's not just a metaphor anymore. - ohreilly, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1Seems like a load of claptrap about how OS will cure all the world's ills.
You know, you could go back to the thing that used to be used for hundreds of years before it - paper and human counting. Like we still do in the UK for certainly the general election (I think some of the other elections use paper ballots and counting machines with human backups) - Snoogs, on 10/27/2009, -1/+1How the hell are you supposed to rig an election when you have thousands of programmers backing eachother up?
- rrwest, on 10/27/2009, -0/+0Sadly, nothing but a complete overhaul of the electoral system will save US elections from further tampering and fraud.
Decades ago, the Canadian government formed a independent, non-partisan agency to oversee elections across the country called Elections Canada. On election days, volunteers who have been given strict training man the polling stations under a supervisor. The volunteers are not allowed to influence voters, nor are they allowed to comment on issues other than the weather. We do not have challengers standing outside the stations to prevent voters from entering the buildings.
The supervisors are not allowed to comment on any political issues, either, nor are they to allow the locked ballot boxes to leave the building until the election is over.
For each position that is up for grabs there is a single, clearly marked piece of paper for that position with the candidates' names. There are also seperate ballot boxes for each position. There are never multiple ballots with dozens of names listed for different positions.
No machines are used to mark ballots and all votes are counted with the same degree of security and accuracy that casinos use to count their money.
While the system is not perfect, at least it is not so complicated that fraud becomes a matter of changing software code or rigging machines to punch the wrong holes.
You can't mistake a box with an X in it for anything else as easliy as you can argue for days about a hole that a worn-out machine punched into a tiny square on a piece of paper crowded with boxes, names and other items.
It seems to work for Canada, I have to ask why it won't work in the US? -
Show 51 - 63 of 63 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is