Hacker News Reader

Note the story isn't "insecurities suspected in voting systems", its "systems exposed for inspection" ... Why would a voting system not be totally open and inspect-able by any citizen of the jurisdiction using it, and/or anyone else? What've they got to hide?

View on HN

The inspection seems to have included the administrator passwords. That seems like something worth hiding from the general public.

Your implication is that whoever has the administrator passwords can tamper with the machine to affect the results. And that someone, who is not the general public, should have access to the passwords. How is that better? So certain chosen individuals an have the power to tamper with the machines, but no one else? Isn't that the exact problem that is concerning people?

Machines that cannot be completely publicly inspected shouldn't be used.

>And that someone, who is not the general public, should have access to the passwords. How is that better?

I'm not in favor of electronic voting either. There was a clear thing covered in this inspection that needs to be hidden. Whether that makes for a good election system is a separate matter.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com