484
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2023
484 points (97.8% liked)
politics
19104 readers
3130 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Can someone who isn't trained figure out how to audit the results to verify they are correct without figuring out who anyone voted for? With simple paper ballots anyone can. With computer voting machines, as someone with a computer science degree i'm confident I can rig the results in a.way that I wouldn't catch is someone else was rigging the results.
You can easily just chuck paper ballots and write new ones. It's easier than hacking a computer system. Trust me, I wrote through all of school.
And either one of these attacks is high risk, low reward. Let's say you can modify a voting machine or toss/replace some paper ballots. You, as one person, aren't going to make much of a difference in the election results - especially national ones. Meanwhile, you'll be risking significant prison time if caught. (And a lot of people will be watching during your attempt.)
Scaling this attack up would require armies of co-conspirators all operating silently, nobody ratting out the others, nobody getting caught, and everyone successfully pulling off their missions. This is something that might be possible in a movie, but it's extremely unlikely in the real world.
Sure, but any idiot understands that attack. Which is why the major political parties send volunteers to watch elections go ensure that doesn't happen.
All you need is a computer science degree and a dream, little buddy.
The irony is that computer scientists were all over this in the 2000's, and absolutely did find that the electronic voting machines were insecure, during elections in 2000, 2002, and 2004, including in Georgia:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions#Security_and_concealment_issues
There's no reason to believe that these researchers have stopped, and it is probably due to their efforts that we have more reliable electronic voting systems now with verified paper trails.
And since with Conservatives, every accusation is a confession, when they accuse the 2020 vote of being rigged, maybe we should ask them what they know about the 2000 and 2004 votes.