Thank you. I'm a bit conflicted about computer voting. In general, doing anything by computer is easier for me. That's how I believe it's been sold to the disability community. It would obviously be easier for many people with disabilities to vote using the computer. Unfortunately somebody has convinced some of the disability leadership that any kind of paper trail connected with computer voting is inherently "inaccessible". How one follows the other is beyond me. I seem to be in the minority (at least within the disability community) in my opinion that voting by computer without some sort of paper trail is a really bad idea.
This is probably more than you wanted to know (or you're already completely aware of these issues). Something pushed a button in me here.
Unfortunately somebody has convinced some of the disability leadership that any kind of paper trail connected with computer voting is inherently "inaccessible". How one follows the other is beyond me.
How odd. I mean, a paper trail isn't of that much use, because even if the computer spits out a piece of paper that shows correctly how you voted, that doesn't guarantee it registered your vote in the same ways as shown on the piece of paper.
Still, a paper trail is better than no paper trail, and it doesn't make sense that a paper trail is "inaccessible." Unless "inaccessible" is a binary condition ... a piece of paper can't be read by a visually impaired person.
Unless "inaccessible" is a binary condition ... a piece of paper can't be read by a visually impaired person.
I guess that's the arguement. Although it still doesn't make any sense to me. I know just enough about computers that I'm not convinced voting by computer will ever be a particularly good idea. Any system can be hacked of course, but I'd rather make it as difficult as possible. Hacking a computer seems entirely too easy to trust. IMHO
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-06 11:52 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-06 12:16 pm (UTC)This is probably more than you wanted to know (or you're already completely aware of these issues). Something pushed a button in me here.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-06 12:32 pm (UTC)How odd. I mean, a paper trail isn't of that much use, because even if the computer spits out a piece of paper that shows correctly how you voted, that doesn't guarantee it registered your vote in the same ways as shown on the piece of paper.
Still, a paper trail is better than no paper trail, and it doesn't make sense that a paper trail is "inaccessible." Unless "inaccessible" is a binary condition ... a piece of paper can't be read by a visually impaired person.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-06 01:05 pm (UTC)I guess that's the arguement. Although it still doesn't make any sense to me. I know just enough about computers that I'm not convinced voting by computer will ever be a particularly good idea. Any system can be hacked of course, but I'd rather make it as difficult as possible. Hacking a computer seems entirely too easy to trust. IMHO