Skip to main content

#7844 Electronic voting

Electronic voting. Yea, even internet voting. Really shouldn't be impossible.

Tom Scott says this is a terrible idea, but I don't think it's so unsolvable. The ways to cheat are:
- stuffing the ballot box with bogus votes
- counting or recording the votes bogusly
- voting more than once or voting for someone else

Voter confidentiality must be preserved. 

Here's my solution. 
- every voter must authenticate with some non-government system that 1) ensures user ID uniqueness 2) contains a method for contacting the voter (can be a form obscuring contact details) 3) creates a random code which is not retained by the system. This is easily done by Google, Facebook, or any tiny NGO. They would need to register and be subject to audit.
- when a user votes, the data is logged in two public registers. 1) a voters register showing the person's user ID (or a unique variant from the authenticator) 2) a vote register showing the random code and how they voted. 

With this system, anyone can
- re-tally the election
- check for duplicate voters
- check for bogus (e.g. dead) voters
- check that their vote was counted accurately (or anyone for whom they have the random code)
- perform a retrospective study, selecting random people and asking them to indicate whether their vote was correct or not.


Note: The random code doesn't need to be unique per se, since the risk of overlap isn't such a big deal, but it should be complex enough that this is a statistical unlikelihood.

Some kinks would still need to be worked out, but I think with these elements this is doable:
- public register of voters (already the case more or less with people seen at voting places)
- public register of votes (not already the case)
- separate authentication (could be done in the same way as voter registration. Each voter signs up with their authenticator and then registers in the government system with ID and SS# indicating which authenticator they're using and unique ID.)
- polling booths can still exist just with the same electronic systems there.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

#8799 Shot-gun microphone for Q&A sessions

Have you ever been in a speech or something where the speaker fields questions from the audience? If you weren't in a UN-style microphone-at-every-seat equipped room, then you probably saw one or two saps running the microphone around to those asking questions. I was this sap recently in a press conference, and although I consider myself quite agile, it still delayed things and was noisy for the cameras (not to mention my beautimous profile when I had to run in front of them). I've also heard people bragging about shot-gun mics that can pick up someone's voice leagues away. Couldn't these work in this situation, where the sap can just stand at the front with headphones on and point the mic at whoever is talking? Maybe it wouldn't work so well in a football stadium, but surely a 20-person press conference could manage. Right?

#8763 18-yr-old "welcome to the board" brochure

I realize I wasn't the most with it teenager, but I certainly wasn't the bottom of the ladder. My knowledge of politics and the political system was restricted to national systems and that was last informed in 5th grade. What I'm thinking of is some kind of letter or email or web site where a new 18-yr-old can go to and see "Hey, you're of legal voting age. Welcome to the board." This would then explain that there are a whole lot of public servants out there working for you. And in fact, you don't have to hate the police, because in effect they work for you. And if you have a problem you can contact Mr Chief of Police or you can vote for the other guy when reelection time comes up. Also you have all these other people working for you including the mayor, governor, and up. If you think things should be run differently (and chances are they should) you should write to this person, or attend this meeting, or vote this way. Essentially demystify the behemoth o...

#7483 Broadcast Café

This café is wired. There are cameras and microphones everywhere. What goes on inside is constantly broadcast in real-time on the café's website. There is a bold disclaimer on the front door telling everyone who enters that their conversation and image will be viewable by anyone accessing the site. It is open from 6am to 2am the next morning to maximize global viewing time, without becoming too seedy. It is located in New York or LA or maybe both. Another option: At the same time, monitors in the cafe show analytics in real time of how many people are on the website and where they are located. Maybe it even shows how many people are watching each camera and listening to each microphone. Perhaps people on-line could post chats and be active participants as well. Would no one want to go to a café where their privacy is completely nil? Would no one want to sit at their computer and watch people living instead of doing it themselves? Or do people have an inner desire to be seen, especi...