Here's what we learned over the past 10 days of fact-finding hearings, which ended Friday and included testimony from politicians, bureaucrats and representatives from several intelligence and security agencies:
Don’t misunderstand me, I know very well the USA can interfere with our stuff, they do it on a daily basis. They surely do it to every country they can as well.
We, Canadians, probably interfere or at least try to, in other countries too.
What I meant is the more actors there are, the more difficult it is to break free from it.
Glad we still have elections on paper, somewhat safer than electronic ones.
Glad we still have elections on paper, somewhat safer than electronic ones.
Is that a prevalent concept in Canada? The way I see it cryptography researchers already figured out the math to make electronic voting safer than paper, it’s just a matter of reform (like anything politics).
Is [triple-counted paper ballots] a prevalent concept in Canada?
Yeah, it is. Because it works really well.
The way I see it cryptography researchers already figured out the math to make electronic voting safer than paper
No, it’s not. And the math isn’t the problem. Our paper elections have scrutiny like open-source code, and voting machine code does not. Issues are spotted at vastly different rates, and not how you’d think without understanding the workings of both.
Also it’s far, far less expensive to set up a polling station. We can do it in a morning, run an election all day - one day - and then shut it down after the count and we’re out of there.
I see. Thanks for sharing. I come from a place that uses electronic voting without any major issues so from my point of view this reluctance is a bit of a mystery. But now at least I know the arguments that float around the topic.
Don’t misunderstand me, I know very well the USA can interfere with our stuff, they do it on a daily basis. They surely do it to every country they can as well.
We, Canadians, probably interfere or at least try to, in other countries too.
What I meant is the more actors there are, the more difficult it is to break free from it.
Glad we still have elections on paper, somewhat safer than electronic ones.
Is that a prevalent concept in Canada? The way I see it cryptography researchers already figured out the math to make electronic voting safer than paper, it’s just a matter of reform (like anything politics).
Yeah, it is. Because it works really well.
No, it’s not. And the math isn’t the problem. Our paper elections have scrutiny like open-source code, and voting machine code does not. Issues are spotted at vastly different rates, and not how you’d think without understanding the workings of both.
Also it’s far, far less expensive to set up a polling station. We can do it in a morning, run an election all day - one day - and then shut it down after the count and we’re out of there.
I see. Thanks for sharing. I come from a place that uses electronic voting without any major issues so from my point of view this reluctance is a bit of a mystery. But now at least I know the arguments that float around the topic.