Hillary Clinton and Electoral Fraud | Hacker News Reader

Hillary Clinton and Electoral Fraud

medium.com

24 pointscryoshon14 comments

Previously discussed and debunked yesterday on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11599083

not remotely debunked...

Couldn't you digitally sign the source code of these machines and have that verified by officials? Inspection as well. You could stuff a ballot box without the machine if there's no oversight.

Uhhh, apparently Spencer Gundert is too young to remember all the other times there have been election fraud (Bush-Florida) and the brew-ha-ha over the crappy voting machines we've had for way too long. Drop in the bucket, buddy.

Why do we even have to leave the house? Everyone should get a government issued digital certificate, and vote using email.

Because there are still a few million people without a home computer.

Those 1% can visit public issued computers, public wifi, libraries, etc...

Internet is a basic human right in most developed countries, this is a non-issue.

We're not talking about most developed countries, we're talking about the United States.

The Internet, like many other things that are considered basic human rights in other countries, isn't a basic human right here. You can talk about using libraries and publicly-issues to fill the gaps, but, unfortunately, US politicians know how to game those things. They'll manipulate funding for public computers, change library hours and maybe even relocate libraries to gain a small electoral advantages.

And before you say they won't, that's exactly what happens today with polling places, distribution of voting machines and (in states that require photo ID to vote) locations and hours of DMVs (and any other places you can use to get a state-issued photo ID).

If it is already happening, they switching to certificates is better because you don't need a special voting machine, as every internet access point becomes one.

Available in: libraries, coffee places, public wifi, neighbours, friends, mobile phone, etc...

I don't see why politicians would actively oppose something like this. It's more a matter of practicality. There's barely a handful of countries that hold internet access a human right and they still don't have 100% penetration. Just a right that access has to be available. A working computer or smartphone costs money on its own. The US is about 88% which is pretty good, but not 100%.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER.P2

"Why electronic voting is a bad idea"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI

Because it's too hard to secure everybody's home computers. A botnet could swing an election.

Good point, I agree. Until we get computer literate humans, we can't really use computers for such things.

Even with competent computer owners it's a problem. Bruce Schneier once pointed out that, given how much money is spent on presidential elections, we should assume that election hackers have budgets of $100 million. They could easily pay for zero-days.

It's not even out of the question that organizations like the NSA could launch attacks, or their counterparts in other countries.

It's also a problem for electronic voting machines without paper trails. One researcher several years ago demonstrated a way to make a virus attacking a popular voting machine. Without a way to audit the results, there's no way to know whether this has happened.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com