Even if you could make a perfect digital system through encryption and keys and further complexities, to the layman this is effectively a magic black box that they have to trust does the job. If you can't explain it simply to that layman without saying "trust me bro", it doesn't fix the primary problem we currently have with our voting system, the lack of trust in the system.
My point was not that these examples are issues to be concerned with in a voting system. Instead I was pointing out that computers fail at counting all the time. It's also not even my full argument. You dissected one portion of my response and still missed the point I was making.
That's awesome for Brazil. They discovered a perfect flawless man made system. I completely believe it is entirely tamper proof. It's much easier to change whole datasets than to edit enough paper ballots to make a difference in a vote where many millions of people have submitted paper votes. Ctrl+a, del.... Goodbye data. Not that it's possible to do in the Brazilian system. But it certainly is possible in many databases...
Then why don't you create that system?
And then proceed to convince every American that it is good and reliable and will work because it only takes a vocal few to stir question about it. And it only takes a single person finding a small flaw that can probably skew results. And that one flaw that allows someone smarter than you or I, has the power to throw question into our already shaky political system. And you as the producer of the system are entirely liable.
We are already fighting about trust in our voting system, to add the complexity of computerized systems is not going to sway the vast majority of people.
You can't 'miscount' a digital vote.
Yes you absolutely can. Look up flipped bits, look up rounding errors. Look up lossy data. Look up bit overflow. There are many many ways computers miscount things. Hell, many calculators have incongruent output to each other because they do math in a slightly different system.
Because there is no way to prove without a shadow of a doubt that any digital system is 100% reliable. Are all voting machines completely tamper proof? Running unique code that cannot be run elsewhere, and is 100% open source such that the source can be viewed by anyone without exposing itself to risk that a smart enough bad actor can cause havoc? Do these machines need to be networked? Are all the networks completely identical and have 100% uptime? I could go on for hours about the flaws in software.
The general response is usually something to the effect of "well paper ballots and human counting is also flawed" to which my immediate rebuttal is, humans have to write the code and develop the hardware and if humans are flawed, so to will the code they produce be. Digital voting is just the same human error with more steps. Nearly all of the issues with paper voting are present in digital voting and then some.
That's all fine. But also, Trump could and should just release the record of the medical visit. That would quiet a lot of this down. The outrage comes from the "oh my god I was shot with a bullet" and the "look how strong I am" vibe trump is giving off while also not releasing any real evidence aside from the footage of the day.
But I would suspect all of that to be intentional. A void of information creates a vacuum that fills with misinformation and speculation and that causes discourse which is all trump wants.
Because democratic Texans have been convinced that their vote doesn't matter. However that couldn't be further from the truth. Ted Cruz would have lost his last election if something like 6% of registered Dems who did not vote, had voted. Also Greg Abbott would have lost if around a quarter of those registered, non-voting Dems had voted. The propaganda in TX is deeply ingrained in its residents. The state would have voted blue in the last presidential election. Trump won by 8% while over 20 million registered voters did not vote.
IF YOU LIVE IN TEXAS AND YOU ARE READING THIS PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THINGS LIVING, VOTE.
here is a link to verify that you are registered (many residents believe they are registered but are in fact not)
https://www.texas.gov/living-in-texas/texas-voter-registration/
If you are not registered, register here:
https://vrapp.sos.state.tx.us/index.asp
Print out your registration and mail that fucker in today so you'll be ready for early voting in October
YES TEXAS HAS EARLY VOTING AND TIME OFF LAWS. THAT MEANS WORK CANNOT PREVENT YOU FROM TAKING TIME OFF TO GET TO THE VOTING BOOTHS.
The president can also now legally dissolve the Supreme Court and instate a new supreme Court who can then make the decision if it was an official act or not.
Contains cringe, bad comment
The issue is how to enforce granular rules like that. You'll end up with people buying time shares of airbnbs or some other wacky workaround. The issue ultimately is, if you leave any wiggle room, grifters will ruin it for the people using that wiggle room as intended. You can't put in a law and expect everyone to adhere to the spirit of said law. I think with the litany of other property value issues that NY has, this hard line in the sand makes sense. It sucks that the grifters ruined it for people like you and I but the fact of the matter is that they did.
It's finally happened ... my 1070 is finally below minimum requirements for a game I want to play. Guess this will be an Xbox only game for me because I am not paying the insane prices for GPUs.
But then you have the issue of voter retaliation and discrimination. That already happens in certain places in this country if someone even thinks you vote a certain way. If there was a reliable way to find out who someone else voted for in the most recent election, there would be huge social implications.
What if you lose a job because of the way you voted? An employer would not have to disclose that as the reason or any reason at all. Most states are employ at will states where you can be hired or fired for any reason at all with a handful of exceptions. And even with those exceptions, it is very very difficult to prove if those exceptions have been broken.