Slashdot Mirror
West Virginia To Introduce Mobile Phone Voting For Midterm Elections (cnn.com)
West Virginians serving overseas will be the first in the country to cast federal election ballots using a smartphone app, a move designed to make voting in November's election easier for troops living abroad. But election integrity and computer security experts expressed alarm at the prospect of voting by phone, and one went so far as to call it "a horrific idea." CNN: The state's decision to pioneer mobile voting comes even as the United States grapples with Russian interference in its elections. A recent federal indictment outlined Russia's attempts to hack US voting infrastructure during the 2016 presidential race, and US intelligence agencies have warned of Russian attempts to interfere with the upcoming midterm election. Still, West Virginia Secretary of State Mac Warner and Voatz, the Boston company that developed the app, insist it is secure. Anyone using it must first register by taking a photo of their government-issued identification and a selfie-style video of their face, then upload them via the app. Voatz says its facial recognition software will ensure the photo and video show the same person. Once approved, voters can cast their ballot using the Voatz app.
Now we don't even need to get influence from abroad, we can simply let them hack the devices and vote directly.
Cut out the middle man, it's the capitalist way!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
and your boss can force you to vote there way in the office or your fired.
Seriously?
Have you reported them to the authorities? Pretty sure such electoral subversion is a felony.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Therein lies the rub, doesn't it?
On the one hand, anonymous voting protects the voter from retaliation, but puts the entire process at risk of compromise.
"Named voting," conversely, puts the voter at risk but does a lot to secure the process.
Seems like paper ballots + presenting gov't issued photo ID to receive said ballot is a much better process in both ways.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
But is it illegal to let someone else tell you who to vote for?
No: what's illegal is coercion, or attempts to intimidate or threaten a voter to vote a particular way. https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...
We had a meeting yesterday where our CEO went over who to vote for. I think most people just did what they were told. Our ballots are due today. I think most people just did what they were told to
That might be a grey area; since the CEO presumably has hiring and firing authority over the workers, so you could see it as maybe edging toward coercion. I'd say that, given a secret ballot, it's not coercion, since they can't actually tell whether you vote as they suggest or not. But, of course, a non-secret ballot makes coercion a lot more practical.
since, for example, who is going to do the research to pick from 30 different senate primary candidates? Thirty!
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Same with voting by mail here in Washington state. Twice my employer has asked for signed blank ballots.
Wow, that is seriously illegal.
Next time it happens, document it and put their ass in jail.
The annual budget of the US government does not actually support that claim. Cheap, small government was abandoned to a small extent by Clinton, then ...
No. Reagan talked a great game about small government, but what he did was increase the size of government and greatly increase deficit spending.
Republicans only talk about how important it is to reduce government spending when they're not in power.