Spangly new electronic voting

[fluffymark]

They're testing out a new method of voting in stratford. Using electronic cards and touch sensitive screens. All very nice and futuristic. Fun ans well. Imagine using a cash machine (slot the card in, press the screen) but you don't get any money coming out.. I was impressed.
Did anywhere else get these or is everyone else still using pencil and paper?

Comments

[excelsis.livejournal.com]

hmmm. i wouldn't trust them. would make it much easier to cross-reference how you've voted (which is possible now, but takes a lot of time).
pencil and paper works. and its simple. not much to go wrong.
i'm a compsci, which is why i don't trust computers at the moment (give myself and squirrel time to do what we want to do and i may trust them)

[fluffymark]

You're very right to be wary. I was at first. Especially if the damn machine is (for some inexplicable and unneccessary reason) running windows. One crash and the whole thing messes up. And there could be numerous bugs or loopholes that allow people to vote more than they should. But it appears that whoever designed the system has managed to sort out those, there wasn't any sign of any possible way to mess it up. Thats why I was impressed. It *looks* like they've built a dummy-proof system. It may still prove me wrong I guess.

And pressing a screen is nowhere near as satisfying as drawing a cross in a box. It doesn't feel right. But it worked.

[excelsis.livejournal.com]

there /will/ be bugs. the complications of electronic voting are quite considerable, my group project was to do with that.
my biggest concern would be privacy. as it stands, every ballot paper can be traced to the voter, with computerised systems it would be easier to corrolate votes with voter.

[fluffymark]

It doesn't sound *too* difficult but I'll guss you've thought about it a lot lot lot more than me. But at first sight, its just a case of simply counting the votes made, and using some secure way of making sure nobody votes more than once. Athough how you'd do that may be the problem.

I thought It'd be more sensible if the computer 'forgot' who had made each vote immedately after doing so and just kept a track fo the running count of votes for each candidate? This would be simpler, surely, and would guarantee privacy.

Not that I'm fussed at all about the privacy of my vote. I voted green. And not just becasue the only other alternatives were the tories, labour or the BNP (ugh ugh and mega ugh).

[the-lady-lily.livejournal.com]

We have pencil and paper. Nothing fancy, just good old graphite and pulp... Good enough for Cambridge, good enough for anywhere...

Well, it was that or a postal vote. And it's a sunny day. And at least it isn't text message voting, which strikes me as plain silly and goddamn dangerous.

[fluffymark]

I think the main reason for thee electronic voting is for the counting. A computer can count the votes almost instantaneously, and (unless maliciously programmed) won't be biased to mis-count votes. Pencil and paper is wonderful for recording votes, but they then have to be counted by hand, which is easily prone to human error or manipulation.

The whole idea of text voting sound very wrong and sends shivers down my spine. I mean, how on earth is that secure???? *boggle*