First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Post Reply if we solely did paper vote, will the "hacking" rhetoric dissapear?
Posted 15 days ago
never heard of fractionalized votes?
16795 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 15 days ago , edited 15 days ago

kinga750 wrote:

I remember this from highschool, but why is storing the votes as integers better than doubles? Is it just '1' vs '1.0'? Why does that matter?


#1 Integers are faster to process, easier to code and validate for, and preferred in all situations where you don't NEED decimal numbers.
#2 You cannot add votes without adding whole votes, makes it easier to detect cheating too.

Integer vote counting: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9

Double: 1.0, 2.1, 3.1, 4.2, 5.2, 6.3, 7.3, 8.4.... etc

Hackers used to steal fractions of a penny ($.001) from bank accounts in mass because they got rounded off and got hundreds of millions of dollars from doing so while avoiding most of the banks fraud detectors. It was such a small amount so no one noticed till someone started investigating really deep into things and found out the banks were losing millions a day.
17191 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 15 days ago
There was no hacking, the people officially voted for the most embarrassing president in American history.
9558 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Imoutoland!
Offline
Posted 15 days ago
I'm not sure you used rhetoric correctly. In any case, there are a lot of problems with paper vote, and it is essentially in either party's and most people's best interest for the votes to not be hacked, thus the difficulty. In any way, a large scale operation that would be successful would be beyond anyone, or any nation's power. There are far too many eyes keeping watching for digital fraud.
37158 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 15 days ago , edited 15 days ago

Rujikin wrote:


kinga750 wrote:

I remember this from highschool, but why is storing the votes as integers better than doubles? Is it just '1' vs '1.0'? Why does that matter?


#1 Integers are faster to process, easier to code and validate for, and preferred in all situations where you don't NEED decimal numbers.
#2 You cannot add votes without adding whole votes, makes it easier to detect cheating too.

Integer vote counting: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9

Double: 1.0, 2.1, 3.1, 4.2, 5.2, 6.3, 7.3, 8.4.... etc

Hackers used to steal fractions of a penny ($.001) from bank accounts in mass because they got rounded off and got hundreds of millions of dollars from doing so while avoiding most of the banks fraud detectors. It was such a small amount so no one noticed till someone started investigating really deep into things and found out the banks were losing millions a day.


Yes the plot of Office Space and Superman 3

I guess it makes sense to use integers when programming the machines. Why would decimal places be calculated anyway? When would a vote be counted 1.1? Shouldn't it always be +1 or nothing at all? Is there actual evidence that the voting machines we use today can be hacked? If so has it ever actually happened in an election?
16795 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 15 days ago , edited 13 days ago

kinga750 wrote:


Rujikin wrote:


kinga750 wrote:

I remember this from highschool, but why is storing the votes as integers better than doubles? Is it just '1' vs '1.0'? Why does that matter?


#1 Integers are faster to process, easier to code and validate for, and preferred in all situations where you don't NEED decimal numbers.
#2 You cannot add votes without adding whole votes, makes it easier to detect cheating too.

Integer vote counting: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9

Double: 1.0, 2.1, 3.1, 4.2, 5.2, 6.3, 7.3, 8.4.... etc

Hackers used to steal fractions of a penny ($.001) from bank accounts in mass because they got rounded off and got hundreds of millions of dollars from doing so while avoiding most of the banks fraud detectors. It was such a small amount so no one noticed till someone started investigating really deep into things and found out the banks were losing millions a day.


Yes the plot of Office Space and Superman 3

I guess it makes sense to use integers when programming the machines. Why would decimal places be calculated anyway? When would a vote be counted 1.1? Shouldn't it always be +1 or nothing at all? Is there actual evidence that the voting machines we use today can be hacked? If so has it ever actually happened in an election?


Why indeed.... It should always be +1 decimals have no point in a vote counting machine besides manipulation. I'm more worried about internal manipulation of hidden code than hacking personally.

I'm in IT and I can tell you EVERYTHING can be hacked. However knowing that if you pay attention you can prevent hacking while it happens if your security is tight enough and you trust nothing to the point it makes connecting to your own stuff a pain at times.

After working at a few companies I understand completely why people get hacked. The IT people violate good security practices all the time for convenience, fixing/building stuff quickly (leaving gaping security holes to fix later then later never happens), or appeasing the manager who thinks the system is shit because he can't put in the right password or got blocked from accessing company files from his house.
37158 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 15 days ago , edited 15 days ago


So the idea is that machines are compromised at the software level, for example counting 1.2 votes for Clinton and 1.0 for Trump. Is there any evidence of this happening?

Based on some quick reading, many experts favor much stronger and widespread election auditing, which is arguably inadequate at the moment. Certainly the machines can be improved, but proper auditing should catch fraud even when the machines are compromised. Also since most voting is done on paper, stronger auditing is probably a good idea.
14777 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 15 days ago

redokami wrote:

there will always be fraud

but if we went paper nation wide, then you cant blame "hacking" right? or Russia


Google up "2000", "Florida", "Jeb Bush" and "Dings".
33051 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Texas
Offline
Posted 15 days ago

Amyas_Leigh wrote:



Postal workers


These guys definitely got fired
1616 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / US
Offline
Posted 15 days ago
it was a joke, the person was never even working at a post office


http://www.snopes.com/postal-worker-caught-destroying-absentee-trump-ballots-in-major-swing-state/
Emtro 
1563 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 15 days ago

redokami wrote:

there will always be fraud

but if we went paper nation wide, then you cant blame "hacking" right? or Russia


so then also what would the left blame it on?


If they didn't have hacking rhetoric we'd be back to "chad chewing"...
16795 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 15 days ago , edited 15 days ago

kinga750 wrote:



So the idea is that machines are compromised at the software level, for example counting 1.2 votes for Clinton and 1.0 for Trump. Is there any evidence of this happening?

Based on some quick reading, many experts favor much stronger and widespread election auditing, which is arguably inadequate at the moment. Certainly the machines can be improved, but proper auditing should catch fraud even when the machines are compromised. Also since most voting is done on paper, stronger auditing is probably a good idea.


Not just auditing but make all code open source and allow people to inspect it on any device upon request. It's hard to hide vote manipulation when anyone can see the code and look over it themselves. Plus when everyone can look at it bugs can be found and eliminated much more often which would make it harder to hack.

That's one of the reasons linux is so secure. We literally have people finding so many bugs and holes that there are not enough people available to fix them all and even knowing that its still at least 10X as secure as windows.
19563 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / NYC Metro Area
Online
Posted 15 days ago
Isn't it amazing that in the year 2016 that we still can figure out how to count votes?
Ideally, districts would have some sort of paper trail in addition to electronic scanning of ballots (how my state does it).
Moreover, it is definitely for the best that the nation never adopts a single voting software/electronic voting system as to diversify software/machines used so that it makes it more or less impossible to "hack" the election at a national level.
16795 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 15 days ago , edited 13 days ago

kevz_210 wrote:

Isn't it amazing that in the year 2016 that we still can figure out how to count votes?
Ideally, districts would have some sort of paper trail in addition to electronic scanning of ballots (how my state does it).
Moreover, it is definitely for the best that the nation never adopts a single voting software/electronic voting system as to diversify software/machines used so that it makes it more or less impossible to "hack" the election at a national level.


I've also heard that dipping your finger in this permanent purple ink works well as well. I've heard there is nothing that can get rid of it without leaving easy to see traces.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_ink
19563 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / NYC Metro Area
Online
Posted 15 days ago , edited 15 days ago

Rujikin wrote:


kevz_210 wrote:

Isn't it amazing that in the year 2016 that we still can figure out how to count votes?
Ideally, districts would have some sort of paper trail in addition to electronic scanning of ballots (how my state does it).
Moreover, it is definitely for the best that the nation never adopts a single voting software/electronic voting system as to diversify software/machines used so that it makes it more or less impossible to "hack" the election at a national level.


I've also heard that dipping your finger in this permanent purple ink works well as well. I've heard there is nothing that can get rid of it without leaving easy to see traces.


Quite common south of the border and developing countries.

That being said, not so sure if it is any effective. All it does is that it prevents people from voting twice, still does nothing to check if the voter is eligible in the first place or deals with the elephant in the room: absentee ballots...
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.