Confusion as Democratic Results Are Delayed in Iowa | Hacker News Reader

Confusion as Democratic Results Are Delayed in Iowa

nytimes.com

13 pointsdilap4 comments

The official position is that there was no foul play, but I still can't believe in this time of super-heightened cyber-security concerns, anyone in the Democratic party would try and use a smartphone app for anything election related. The whole platform (IMHO) is compromised when you're talking nation-state level adversaries, let alone when your opponent is the Commander-in-Chief of the NSA/CIA, the ones who we all know put the back doors in place to begin with.

Occams razor though - in 2016 Bernie got gypped and lobbied for a new process. Half a case of beer says that as soon as they have a proper accountability, it comes to light that nobody really has any clue how the system is supposed to work.

Apps are fine for quick reporting as long as they're also backed by multiple "more official" records. The Iowa DNC has been very tight lipped, so it's hard to say if that's really the case.

What astounds me is that this process is not transparently published for Iowa voters to see months before the actual caucuses. Especially in light of the pressure from the Sanders campaign.

No, they really are not. Incrementlisim is a very old social manipulation tool.

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

Not sure I buy the slippery slope here. Should we also stop using computers in cars and planes? What about stocks and payment systems?

Election results should be backed by multiple, independent records including (but not limited to) a paper trail. Those records should be thoroughly audited for accuracy and consistency. It's perfectly fine to use computers as a quick-and-easy record as long as it's backed by more robust solutions.

Everyone talks about electronic voting vs paper as though it has to be one or the other. It should be both!

A strong password is recommended, but it's not a substitute for 2FA. In the same way, a robust, highly-auditable voting record is recommended, but it's not a substitute for redundancy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com