Fox having to pay a substantial damages settlement to Dominion is a just outcome; their amplification of lies about malicious backdoors and rigged elections was contemptible and dangerous.

But we shouldn't conclude from this that US voting systems are perfectly or even adequately protected against attack. While great progress has been made, there's still a great deal of work left to do to make our elections truly secure and robust.

The best thing that Dominion could do with their infusion of cash from Fox - for both their reputation and for the good of democracy - would be to invest it into developing more robust, auditable election technology, such as optical scan systems with features to facilitate Risk-Limiting Audits.

@mattblaze hand marked scantron is the only realistic solution. Allows quick results and a verifiable paper ballot for recounts.

Any *private* non-public source code counting our votes is absolutely undemocratic.

@pixelpusher220 @mattblaze
how does that differ from the Dominion ICX (ImageCast Evolution) already in use which literally tabulates paper ballots electronically for near-term tabulation while the verifiable paper ballot is retained in the event an audit or recount?

@apenguininspace @mattblaze that's the problem. We don't know.

A paper trail is better than nothing but there's just precious little benefit to having a software program do the voting part.

If they open source their code so it's reviewable, that would be ok...but still overkill for what's needed, simple scan n read.

Next up is the blatant security failure of these *private* machines. Sure they've been improved, but why incorporate the risk if you don't have to?

https://m.slashdot.org/story/298229

Slashdot

@pixelpusher220 @apenguininspace Here’s the problem: today’s elections in the US are incredibly complex compared with the rest of the world. We vote on a ton of different races, and it’s simply not feasible in most of the US to tally ballots without automation. But automation is inherently unreliable and insecure.

Risk limiting audits are an efficient way to get the benefits of automation while also assuring against errors or compromises of the tally system.

@mattblaze @apenguininspace yes, scantron is automation.

My issue is unaudited, untested machines running unaudited code. The examples of bad (or basically no) security are legion as any private actor will only do the minimum.

I still posit that the software voting machines provide no significant benefit, let alone when weighed against the increased risks.

Edit: *publicly audited

@apenguininspace @pixelpusher220 You can’t audit software sufficiently well to provide assurance, whether open source or not. What you can do is audit the tally. This is why election security experts are focused on things like RLAs rather than the impossible task of making software and hardware perfect and impenetrably secure.

@mattblaze @apenguininspace

Agreed it adds layers of risk...that are almost entirely avoided by scantron counting.

Risk limiting audits can be done regardless of the counting method.

What measurable increase in reporting does software voting provide?

@apenguininspace @pixelpusher220 No, that’s wrong. Optical scan systems are just as vulnerable to tampering and software errors as any other complex system. An optical scanner is made of software, which can have errors, be compromised, or be maliciously replaced. Their benefit isn’t that they’re more secure. It’s that you can audit (with RLAs) the ballots that went through them to verify the tally that they produced.
@mattblaze @apenguininspace so scantron can't be RLAd? That doesn't seem correct
@apenguininspace @pixelpusher220 yes, it can. Read what I wrote.

@mattblaze @apenguininspace you'd mentioned them in the context of software systems so I mistook which you were applying it too.

So yes both can be RLAd (and should be).

Still don't see any sizable benefit to software voting systems. Voter hand marked scantron seems the best of both worlds while limiting the risks.

But I guess we'll disagree on that.

Thx

@pixelpusher220 @apenguininspace OPTICAL SCANNERS (“SCANTRON” SYSTEMS ) ARE MADE OF SOFTWARE. If you want optical scanners, you get software.

@mattblaze @apenguininspace

Cool. To summarize
Both have *software*. (Won't argue soft vs firmware)
Both are RLA capable.
Both produce fast results.

One has VOTER HAND MARKED BALLOTS.

I'm going with that one, thx.

@apenguininspace @pixelpusher220 I’m not sure what you even mean by “that one”. Scantron is a brand name for an optical scan system. They’re made of software, just like all ballot tally devices are.

@mattblaze @apenguininspace

Scantron is a generic term at this point. We used them 40 years ago in school.

Scantron *generic* vs a voting system that uses a computer to allow people to vote and then prints out something afterwards. (Like an unreadable barcode...do we require a phone to vote now?)

The scantron system, IMO, is better.

@pixelpusher220 @mattblaze @apenguininspace funny we the french have no issues whatsoever counting 1000 or so ballots per ballot box…
Voting is always on a sunday (so that everyone can participate as most companies are closed) and we get the final results at 3am or so on monday…
@sxpert @mattblaze @apenguininspace @pixelpusher220 Yes, European elections are generally single issue/level, whereas the US holds elections to all levels at the same time. So federal, state, municipal elections are all in the same ballot. Add in some referendums and judgeships and transportation board members and whatnot and you start to understand why it takes time to count.
@sjuvonen @apenguininspace @mattblaze @pixelpusher220
Maybe the US should split those at multiple dates or something
@sxpert @mattblaze @apenguininspace @pixelpusher220 They’ve been doing it like this for well over 200 years and are not generally eager to take advice from the rest of the world.
@mattblaze @pixelpusher220 @sjuvonen @apenguininspace
Indeed they’ve been imposing their view on the rest of the world for far too long 😎
@sxpert Be nice now. Your country has some considerable experience imposing its views on the rest of the world as well.
Timeline of United States military operations - Wikipedia

@sxpert oh would you have preferred they left France unliberated?
@sjuvonen I would have prefered they wouldn't have set up countless coup d'etat in various countries (Chile, Iran, Afghanistan,...) just because they had socialist / communist regimes, or illegally invaded or bombed others like Iraq, Lybia and Syria, the world would have been a much better place.
Also, they have committed countless crimes against humanity, including invading the US proper and committing genocide against the natives there.

@sjuvonen @sxpert @mattblaze @apenguininspace @pixelpusher220 voting on the smaller issues at the same time as the major ones increases turnout.

If the presidency was won based on popular vote it would be a huge benefit to turnout for all elections.

@sxpert @mattblaze @apenguininspace @sjuvonen @pixelpusher220

Multiple elections would be too expensive. It isn't cheap to run an election. I manage a couple of precincts for Ohio. I'm required to take a 3 hour training class. It takes an hour or two of setup the night before the election. Election day starts at 0500 and finally ends at about 2200 when everything is broken down and turned in to the Board of Elections. It is becoming harder and harder to find people to do this work.

@sxpert @pixelpusher220 @mattblaze @apenguininspace ditto here in Australia. Most races are decided within a few hours of polls closing.

But US ballots are... different. They vote on *heaps* of things at once, on the same piece of paper. For example, how long would it take to hand count all the races on this sucker? It's not even the most complicated I've seen, just the first one I found in a quick image search.

@womble @sxpert @pixelpusher220 @mattblaze @apenguininspace the Michigan Republican Party did away with voting machines to elect their internal officers. They barely finished the president election before being kicked out of the venue.
Something like 3000 people voted.