Send "Russia Hacked Democracy" to Moscow Mitch

Eunoli

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
238
Let me preface this with a warning that its is Michael Bennet who is doing this and it /does/ support his campaign to do this. I don't usually post campaign stuff, but I am happy to post anything that gets in Traitor Turtle's face.

That said, for a donation of $1, you can send a copy of Russia Hacked Democracy to Moscow Mitch as part of a pressure campaign to make him take action to protect the election. I am somewhat in love with the idea of him getting tens of thousands of these dumped at his doorstep.

Send Dividing America to Moscow Mitch

(I donated $1 twice. Just be careful to uncheck all the usual Act Blue attempts to get you to subscribe.)
 

Brenda Archer

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
897
Location
Arizona
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
Sept 2007
SLU Posts
12005
I’m seriously considering voting for this guy just for this. And he knows the West, so it would be all win if he got it. He’s also a strong VP choice (either him or Buttigieg).
 
  • 1Agree
Reactions: Eunoli

Kara Spengler

Queer OccupyE9 Sluni-Goon
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,418
Location
SL: November RL: DC
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
December, 2008
SLU Posts
23289
/me tries not to say anything about the title :)
 

Aeon Jiminy

Active member
Joined
Oct 9, 2018
Messages
99
I went to Michael Bennet 's website to read about his proposals to secure elections, which I'm all in favor of. But I'm stuck on this one:

"Our plan raises standards and increases resources to protect every precinct in America with new voting machines, mandatory audits, improved election procedures, and stronger cybersecurity. "

It's like machines are the only solution and Europe and Canada doesn't exist in election procedure and healthcare. If hacking is the problem, doesn't it make sense to stop smoking? I'd prefer taking election tallying out of the hands of tech companies and put it in the hands of plain ole people . It's quaint and slow, I know. Some things are worth waiting for. I was willing to wait for the Florida votes to be counted in 2000.
 

Katheryne Helendale

🐱 Kitty Queen🐱
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,324
Location
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
I went to Michael Bennet 's website to read about his proposals to secure elections, which I'm all in favor of. But I'm stuck on this one:

"Our plan raises standards and increases resources to protect every precinct in America with new voting machines, mandatory audits, improved election procedures, and stronger cybersecurity. "

It's like machines are the only solution and Europe and Canada doesn't exist in election procedure and healthcare. If hacking is the problem, doesn't it make sense to stop smoking? I'd prefer taking election tallying out of the hands of tech companies and put it in the hands of plain ole people . It's quaint and slow, I know. Some things are worth waiting for. I was willing to wait for the Florida votes to be counted in 2000.
Imagine hand-counting 157.6 million ballots - slow, tedious, subjective (did this person really mean to mark that?), subject to human error, and even intentional miscounting. It's funny you cite Florida's 2000 ballot fiasco. That was a complete train-wreck. Electronic voting machines are, by contrast, fast, accurate, not subjective (it's either a 1 or a 0), and completely impartial. As long as they are well secured and protected from hacking, there's no reason we shouldn't be using them. Deploying the same system nationwide rather than letting each county choose their own would help in that effort.
 
  • 1Facepalm
Reactions: Amalia Illios

Brenda Archer

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
897
Location
Arizona
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
Sept 2007
SLU Posts
12005
Imagine hand-counting 157.6 million ballots - slow, tedious, subjective (did this person really mean to mark that?), subject to human error, and even intentional miscounting. It's funny you cite Florida's 2000 ballot fiasco. That was a complete train-wreck. Electronic voting machines are, by contrast, fast, accurate, not subjective (it's either a 1 or a 0), and completely impartial. As long as they are well secured and protected from hacking, there's no reason we shouldn't be using them. Deploying the same system nationwide rather than letting each county choose their own would help in that effort.
I'm in the camp that no machine can really be secured. Sort of like how a panel at DEF CON broke into one in two hours.

Paper ballots in the Oregon style would work. It gets mailed to you at home, you fill it out and send it back or drop it off. So you can make your own copy of it before you mail it off in case you'd forget. Such ballots can still be machine tallied.

Printed receipts the voter can take with them would also work IF the voter remembers to double check while still in the voting booth.

In this way, if voter surveys and vote results varied significantly, the paper would be available for a recount. It's not the most ideal way, but there definitely needs to be paper under the voter's control and local control and not just data stored somewhere, however carefully and redundantly.

Yeah I don't trust anybody.
 

danielravennest

Active member
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
814
SLU Posts
9073
Imagine hand-counting 157.6 million ballots - slow, tedious, subjective (did this person really mean to mark that?), subject to human error, and even intentional miscounting. It's funny you cite Florida's 2000 ballot fiasco. That was a complete train-wreck. Electronic voting machines are, by contrast, fast, accurate, not subjective (it's either a 1 or a 0), and completely impartial. As long as they are well secured and protected from hacking, there's no reason we shouldn't be using them. Deploying the same system nationwide rather than letting each county choose their own would help in that effort.
Many places in the US use "Scantron" type ballots. Those are where you fill in the circles next to your choice on paper, then the ballot gets scanned by machine. That keeps a paper record of the ballot, for recounts and checking for irregularities, while making the counting fast. All electronic has too many ways to fail without being able to verify what people voted for. That's why a judge just ordered Georgia to change their all-electronic voting system
 

Katheryne Helendale

🐱 Kitty Queen🐱
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,324
Location
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
Many places in the US use "Scantron" type ballots. Those are where you fill in the circles next to your choice on paper, then the ballot gets scanned by machine. That keeps a paper record of the ballot, for recounts and checking for irregularities, while making the counting fast. All electronic has too many ways to fail without being able to verify what people voted for. That's why a judge just ordered Georgia to change their all-electronic voting system
I can see how that would be better. An electronic means of tallying the ballots so that there is no ambiguity in deciding how someone meant to vote, but with a physical paper trail if there is a call for a recount. I liked the all-electronic method because there's no confusion come voting time. You see the name you want to vote for, you press on that name on the screen, and your vote gets tallied. No confusing paper layouts to deal with. But there does absolutely need to be a paper trail.
 

Kara Spengler

Queer OccupyE9 Sluni-Goon
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,418
Location
SL: November RL: DC
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
December, 2008
SLU Posts
23289
I went to Michael Bennet 's website to read about his proposals to secure elections, which I'm all in favor of. But I'm stuck on this one:

"Our plan raises standards and increases resources to protect every precinct in America with new voting machines, mandatory audits, improved election procedures, and stronger cybersecurity. "

It's like machines are the only solution and Europe and Canada doesn't exist in election procedure and healthcare. If hacking is the problem, doesn't it make sense to stop smoking? I'd prefer taking election tallying out of the hands of tech companies and put it in the hands of plain ole people . It's quaint and slow, I know. Some things are worth waiting for. I was willing to wait for the Florida votes to be counted in 2000.
Missives from Defcon last weekend ...


Then there is this:

 

Katheryne Helendale

🐱 Kitty Queen🐱
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,324
Location
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009

Kara Spengler

Queer OccupyE9 Sluni-Goon
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,418
Location
SL: November RL: DC
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
December, 2008
SLU Posts
23289
Alright, alright, I concede. Electronic voting is a bad idea. Now, how do you stop the trainwreck that happened in Florida in 2000 from happening again?
Print ballots on paper and give voters pencils. Seriously, everyone thinks high tech is the way to solve problems but it just creates more.
 

Katheryne Helendale

🐱 Kitty Queen🐱
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,324
Location
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
Print ballots on paper and give voters pencils. Seriously, everyone thinks high tech is the way to solve problems but it just creates more.
Yes, but then you're introducing human error and potential for fraud in the hand-counting process. How do you eliminate those?

The real problem is, if someone is determined to rig an election, there's no practical way to stop them.
 

Kara Spengler

Queer OccupyE9 Sluni-Goon
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,418
Location
SL: November RL: DC
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
December, 2008
SLU Posts
23289
Yes, but then you're introducing human error and potential for fraud in the hand-counting process. How do you eliminate those?

The real problem is, if someone is determined to rig an election, there's no practical way to stop them.
You still have human error and people deliberately trying to skew things with machines, that does not change and neither does the solution. Everything is done multiple times with observers.
 
  • 1Thanks
  • 1Agree
Reactions: Brenda Archer and Eunoli

Katheryne Helendale

🐱 Kitty Queen🐱
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,324
Location
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
You still have human error and people deliberately trying to skew things with machines, that does not change and neither does the solution. Everything is done multiple times with observers.
They say the best way to secure a computer system is to completely disconnect it from everything and lock it in a vault. That doesn't make it very usable, however. The same way with balloting. There has to be a workable compromise between security and expediency. Yes, you could lock all the ballots in a secure room with armed guards and a bevy of people hand-tallying each ballot in triplicate to ensure complete accuracy and no chance of fraud. But we'll never find out the election results in any kind of timely manner that way. Not with potentially 245 million ballots to count (if everyone eligible registered and voted), or 157 million (if everyone currently registered voted), or even the 135.4 million ballots cast in 2016.
 

danielravennest

Active member
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
814
SLU Posts
9073
Yes, but then you're introducing human error and potential for fraud in the hand-counting process. How do you eliminate those?
In democratic places that use paper ballots, you use volunteer election officials to do the counting, with observers from the various parties to watch them. In some places, they count the votes twice, with different people doing the counting, and the total votes cast has to match the number of people who signed in to vote.
 

danielravennest

Active member
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
814
SLU Posts
9073
But we'll never find out the election results in any kind of timely manner that way. Not with potentially 245 million ballots to count (if everyone eligible registered and voted), or 157 million (if everyone currently registered voted), or even the 135.4 million ballots cast in 2016.
The county I live in has a population of 1 million, and 250 voting precincts. That's one per 4000 population, or one per 1666 actual voters per precinct. That's not an impossible number to tally by hand. In fact, being in Georgia, we will be going to printed ballots scanned by machine, which will have the totals as soon as the polls close.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: Brenda Archer

Kara Spengler

Queer OccupyE9 Sluni-Goon
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,418
Location
SL: November RL: DC
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
December, 2008
SLU Posts
23289
They say the best way to secure a computer system is to completely disconnect it from everything and lock it in a vault. That doesn't make it very usable, however. The same way with balloting. There has to be a workable compromise between security and expediency. Yes, you could lock all the ballots in a secure room with armed guards and a bevy of people hand-tallying each ballot in triplicate to ensure complete accuracy and no chance of fraud. But we'll never find out the election results in any kind of timely manner that way. Not with potentially 245 million ballots to count (if everyone eligible registered and voted), or 157 million (if everyone currently registered voted), or even the 135.4 million ballots cast in 2016.
Actually, I am meeting up with some other hacker types soon. My current plan is to not take a laptop with me, leave any mag stripes in my usual faraday cage wallet, not leave my keys out where they can be photographed, and probably leave my phone off, especially since I do not know them or the local wifi and they are picking the meetup location. Will I hopefully be able to relax my guard in the future? Yes, but I would have only myself to blame if someone wanted to cyberattack the new person.

This is pretty much the same thing with voting except you NEVER relax your guard and you NEVER trust people or a process. There already are multiple people observing counts (reps/lawyers for any party on the ballot). In places (I do not have the # offhand) we already do manual counts. In fact if you watch on election night not all precincts report in when polls close in that state, unless there are still people voting the reason is there counting process.
 
  • 1Agree
Reactions: Brenda Archer

Soen Eber

Vatican mole
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
358
Imagine hand-counting 157.6 million ballots - slow, tedious, subjective (did this person really mean to mark that?), subject to human error, and even intentional miscounting. It's funny you cite Florida's 2000 ballot fiasco. That was a complete train-wreck. Electronic voting machines are, by contrast, fast, accurate, not subjective (it's either a 1 or a 0), and completely impartial. As long as they are well secured and protected from hacking, there's no reason we shouldn't be using them. Deploying the same system nationwide rather than letting each county choose their own would help in that effort.
Oh my sweet summer child...




 
Last edited: