Comments on: Why party like its 1999? http://cultureby.com/2008/03/why-party-like.html This Blog Sits At the Intersection of Anthropology and Economics Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:43:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: peter http://cultureby.com/2008/03/why-party-like.html/comment-page-1#comment-1922 peter Fri, 21 Mar 2008 05:49:09 +0000 http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=315#comment-1922 The key problem with electronic voting versus paper voting -- as with most current efforts at computerization of prior business or organizational processes -- is that electronic systems typically concentrate and centralize what were previously distributed activities, and thus make malicious or imcompetent behaviours easier to execute and also (a separate issue) vastly alter their consequences. To alter paper votes (even if done by one person) usually requires many thousands of illegal actions, while to alter electonically-held votes may require just one action (eg, changing a parameter in some code). While the probability of vote-rigging may not change with e-voting, the ease with which it can be undertaken and its consequences have both increased markedly. The issue has arisen with some vengeance here in Britain, where the Government last year mislaid 2 CD-ROMS containing confidential personal details (including names, addresses and bank account details) of 25 million recipients of family welfare benefits. If the Government did not hold a single central database of such data, but instead relied on many local, distributed databases, the consequences of malicious or incompetent behaviour would be much less. The key problem with electronic voting versus paper voting — as with most current efforts at computerization of prior business or organizational processes — is that electronic systems typically concentrate and centralize what were previously distributed activities, and thus make malicious or imcompetent behaviours easier to execute and also (a separate issue) vastly alter their consequences. To alter paper votes (even if done by one person) usually requires many thousands of illegal actions, while to alter electonically-held votes may require just one action (eg, changing a parameter in some code). While the probability of vote-rigging may not change with e-voting, the ease with which it can be undertaken and its consequences have both increased markedly.

The issue has arisen with some vengeance here in Britain, where the Government last year mislaid 2 CD-ROMS containing confidential personal details (including names, addresses and bank account details) of 25 million recipients of family welfare benefits. If the Government did not hold a single central database of such data, but instead relied on many local, distributed databases, the consequences of malicious or incompetent behaviour would be much less.

]]> By: srp http://cultureby.com/2008/03/why-party-like.html/comment-page-1#comment-1921 srp Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:15:26 +0000 http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=315#comment-1921 Actually, the momentum is in the reverse direction. Democrats' unhappiness with the 2000 outcome led to a lot of scapegoating of electronic voting, along with a new appreciation of its actual vulnerability to various forms of hacking. Given that a secure vote is not as important to the republic as a vote that is seen to be secure, expect to see more paper in your voting future. Actually, the momentum is in the reverse direction. Democrats’ unhappiness with the 2000 outcome led to a lot of scapegoating of electronic voting, along with a new appreciation of its actual vulnerability to various forms of hacking. Given that a secure vote is not as important to the republic as a vote that is seen to be secure, expect to see more paper in your voting future.

]]>