Slashdot Mirror


E-Voting Done Right - In Australia

tehanu writes "After all the furor over e-voting in America, Wired News has an article about e-voting done right in Australia. An important factor is that all of the software is open-source. The company responsible actually seems to have given consideration to the integrity of the democratic process, too - from the lead engineer: 'Why on earth should (voters) have to trust me -- someone with a vested interest in the project's success? A voter-verified audit trail is the only way to 'prove' the system's integrity to the vast majority of electors, who after all, own the democracy.' They also have scathing words for Diebold: 'The only possible motive I can see for disabling some of the security mechanisms and features in their system is to be able to rig elections. It is, at best, bad programming; at worst, the system has been designed to rig an election.' In general they are 'gob-smacked' by the whole situation with electronic voting machines in the US right now."

4 of 485 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Open source? by KD5YPT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure it doesn't guarantee a fault-proof or secure voting system, anyone can install wrong or malicious software on machines, even a closed system one. The point here is that we eliminated or reduced the possibility of having holes in the software intended to be in the machine. Hey, it's better to have hundreds and thousands of people to look at it, then to have a handful of stressed out employee with vested interest in the company to examine the code.

    In another note, voting receipts is nice, no question about that.

    --
    In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
  2. Re:real democracy by stratjakt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Think of the implications of a true democracy.

    Think of the masses voting on each and every topic.

    How much does your average citizen know about foreign policy? Health care? Criminal and civil law?

    A true democracy would be the worst form of government I could think of, unless you happen to have the exact same opinions as >50% of the population, you're fucked.

    Realize that around 70% of Americans are christian. Now, lets vote on whether or not to allow that mosque or synagogue (sp) to open its doors on the corner, or whether gays should be allowed to parade, etc..

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  3. Re:Open source? by GaelenBurns · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We all need to send copies of the internal Diebold memos to all of the mainstream news sources and our congressmen. If we just push for this, and educate our officials and the populace, this blight will be removed. All we need to do is, as a community, get off our asses and fight.

    I'm not one for playing the mindless patriotism card, but I really do feel that (for the Americans out there) it is our duty to do something about this.

  4. Obstacles to US adoption of SI system by quacking+duck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Aside from the double-meaning of my title (e.g. SI = metric system, something the US is also adverse to adopting), I see a couple obstacles facing the Aussie company if they want to break into the US market.

    1) Imagine the outcry from Americans when they learn they're contracting a foreign company to handle their voting system. Oddly enough they won't have cared that Diebold's being all secretive and evasive about their own flaws while SI is open and honest and better suited to uphold the fair democratic system the US claims to cherish. To them I'd say ditch the NIH (not invented here) syndrome--if it works better than what you have, either make a competing product that's truly better or shut up about it.

    2) Diebold will use MS' tactics, calling SI's system "un-American". Again, double meaning, but this time I mean because it's open source.

    3) Watch Diebold play points 1 and 2 to the hilt, calling on its political ties to ensure SI never gets a foothold in the US. In so doing they pull a two-fer, by simultaneously kicking out a leg from under the democratic underpinnings of the US, as well as another leg from the "capitalist" system the US also claims to be, e.g. where companies compete based on the merits of the product and marketing, without political interference.

    Incidentally, the Australian system requires you by law to vote. Maybe that's something the US ought to consider importing too. Argue if you want about being free to NOT vote, but voting is a duty, not just a right, and you should be compelled to do it. Just like you are to report to training if you get drafted, or filing a tax return--you're not free to refuse either of those without legal consequences, right?

    What's sad about my writing this is that I have no influence in US politics, being a Canadian, but I seem to have more interest in your politics than the majority of voting Americans, who don't even bother to go to the polls.