IT IS INSANE THAT VOTING MACHINES ARE NOT OPEN SOURCE.
Login to reply
Replies (101)
FEATURE NOT A BUG
Its insane you guys have voting with ID 🤡🤣 Learned this week 😅
good blockchain use case too
Put your vote to good use this election season.
Write-in: MakeVoting OpenSource
this is one use case where PoA makes sense as you do not care about reorgs
any reorgs can be easily proven with an irregutable proof
Insane that we even have voting machines. Paper only.
FEATURE, NOT A BUG.
Insane that people think voting matters when the actual power they yield, ie their money, has already been taken.
the Venezuelan system for elections is actually good, just so happens that the government is deeply corrupted
The main feature sold to new york was that they are not immutable and have a backdoor. I propose voting machines with no backdoor public ledgers.
Mandibles
Great point 🎯🫡👏
BEEN SAYING THIS FOR YEARS.
FEATURE, NOT A BUG.
It would be if the states using those machines didn’t want to have the option to cheat
If every state wanted an honest election they would have paper ballots like FL and they would count them all on election day
What are you going to do about it?
They want to have the option to cheat and have plausible deniability
Simplest explanation
Voting machines should not exist at all. Paper ballots only.
"trust us bro"
Why wouldn’t you require an ID?
Are you going to vote ?
FAIR BUT ALSO OPEN SOURCE ELECTRONIC MACHINES WITH A PAPER RECEIPT YOU MANUALLY DROP IN AN AUDIT BOX IS A FINE COMPROMISE.
Government for the Cronies by the Cronies
The US Government knows how to run a fair election in other countries 🗳️ why not ours?
It’s insane that in my 100% mail-in state, I can’t see an image of my scanned ballot with the associated vote metadata
To avoid fraud? Or tell me as American how you see it :) Its so different for a European like me the whole Political system in the USA so like to know your perspective.
I don't see why we can have machines with a tiny open source app running assembly, or c, or maybe python that is verifiable by thousand or millions of programmers that it is only counting.
Wait, there is a state that doesn't have in person voting??
There are no European countries that require an ID to vote?
My state has required ID for more than 20 years, never an issue.
Yes they require in EU. But heard not in some states in US?
True. I’m ok with that.
Honestly, not surprising at all. Look at what boomers have prioritized and left us with.
Completely insane, in no way surprising.
I think counties have to provide at least one in person location, but Washington has been mailing every registered voter a ballot since 2018 AFAIK
Oh, I think we have some confusion.
Yes, many states don’t require it. Some do.
Last I checked, I think less than half require it.
Thanks I did not know it was different per state. Good to learn. Stays interesting all these different cultures and how they handle this 🙏 Sawadee from Bangkok
Yep.
The US constitution specifies the individual states legislatures dictate the time, manner, place of the electio. 50 states, 50 rules
Sure, many have that, 6-8 I think. But they all still allow voting at a polling center, mail, and secure drop off I believe.
Not sure I have ever seen one that doesn't have in person at all.
Ok thanks. It’s like Europe every country (USA - state) has his own ‘rules’. But the problem is the centralization of to much things. Like Brussel decide now so much in EU. This must be Washington in USA. Its all about control like I show in one of my artworks 
Again #OpenSourceBSD leads to quicker #World #Peace
It's insane that they're using voting machines at all. Should be paper ballots with guards!
They aren’t that stupid. They know open source gives the power back to the people. 🫡
Criminal, actually
I hate to be "that guy", but this is that rare instance where using a blockchain actually is the right solution to the problem.
Not true. Blockchain still doesn't allow you to verify real world identities and prevent double voting or Sybil attacks without a trusted authority.
Isn't that just a expensive pen at some point
VOTING IS IMMORAL.
HOW YOU VOTE IS IRRELEVANT
How does choosing a new slave master give you power?
Why don't you make open source voting machines?
Blocks over ballots!!!!
Wavlake • Studio
Am trying to understand your point but I need more explanation please.. voting machines are more open than other means
Voting Machines = PoS
Paper Ballots = PoW
Working as intended!
Well you can’t cheat if you do that. And then there’s no bid to the highest payer if you don’t have the cheating to offer.
100%
You’re clearly the brightest among us.
🤣
I find it fascinating on here of all the people that are calling for no machines and only paper ballots. As if paper ballots makes the system MORE secure. The irony is you just put your family’s wealth (or at least, you should have) out of paper fiat and into a digital Bitcoin… Whatever you do, don’t let your friends and family that you are trying to talk into Bitcoin know that you think paper ballots are the solution for a nation with 345 million citizens. If they have half a brain, they’ll have hard questions for you.
An early concept of end-to-end (E2E) verifiable voting systems, designed to provide both transparency and privacy in elections. One of the most well-known examples of this type of system is called Prêt à Voter (French for “Ready to Vote”), introduced by David Chaum, a pioneer in cryptographic voting.
Here’s a high-level breakdown of how it works:
Core Concepts
1. Paper Ballots with Encrypted Codes: Each voter receives a ballot with a list of candidates and an associated encrypted code. The code corresponds to the voter’s choice but is encrypted so that no one, not even the election officials, knows the chosen candidate directly.
2. Separation of Choice and Identity: After marking their choice, the voter tears off a part of the ballot, keeping their selection and a unique encrypted identifier or code. This part of the ballot can be used later to verify that their vote was correctly recorded without revealing which choice they made.
3. Cryptographic Verification: Once the votes are counted, a list of encrypted codes (not the candidates themselves) is published online. Voters can verify that the code associated with their vote appears on this list, proving that their vote was correctly recorded. Only the voter can link this code to their actual choice, preserving privacy.
4. Auditable Transparency: To detect manipulation, independent auditors can verify that the encrypted votes were properly processed through cryptographic proofs, and that the final tally matches the published codes. This process uses a type of zero-knowledge proof, which allows verifying a truth without revealing any actual private data.
Advantages
• Transparency and Trust: The system offers verifiable assurance that all votes are counted accurately, with tamper-evidence at every step.
• Privacy: Voters verify their vote was recorded without disclosing their choice to anyone else.
• Security: Since the system relies on cryptographic proofs, it’s difficult for an attacker to alter the outcome without detection.
Later Innovations
Other similar systems include Scantegrity (used in Takoma Park, Maryland, in 2009), which also employed a verifiable optical scan system, and Helios, an online voting system used in smaller-scale elections that combines E2E verifiability with digital-only ballots.
The whole thing is archaic and purposefully so.
I think this is intentional. But I have no proof.
+1 on this
Democracy is OF the retarded
FROM the retarded
FOR the retarded
Controlled by the jews
Fuck dhimmicracy
Don't need no stinkin' machine.
All you need is open timestamps and good process control.
Ask @Digital Witness .
Makes sense if they wanted to cheat
and they can't give you a receipt, wtf? i literally get i receipt for everything
Guatamala method incoming!
The black-box has replaced the ballot box. Paper ballots are the only way to go.
Como é bom viver em uma país livre que pelo menos se pode criticar as urnas eletrônicas
View quoted note →
This is a problem. There is no way that your vote is verifiable that it was counted in the correct way. Anyone aware of a way to check on this?
It's not "insane". It's either stupid or evil. Let me explain:
If we're assuming the government is incompetent, then it's a bug.
If we're assuming The government is malicious, then it's a feature.
not voting ... ever again.
Alaskans fill out a paper ballot that is fed into a scanner that counts it. They keep the paper as a backup. It's not like that everywhere?
I think in many places you don't get to keep anything and you don't see a running vote total - so you just have to trust/hope that the machine is adding everything up faithfully
Feature not a bug.
I believe this is a symbol of a lack in education.
Our society needs to get out of this centrally mandated edu system.
Maybe we should base education on rabbit holes - leading to so much more discovery and understanding
This is hilarious! Perhaps unintentionally?
I can’t think of any reason for voting machines to exist except for cheating.
Genuinely curious question: How do you validate that the machine runs the open-source software?
We all know why, they are just putting it right in your face now that they are going to cheat and no one can do a thing about it before the election
X (formerly Twitter)
Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) on X
This is 3rd World Corruption: Swing State Georgia, “Democrats are suing to prevent drop box surveillance”
Can anyone please give one logical e...
If I was a judge and that case came across my desk I'd put the plaintiffs in Jail for trying to influence the election.
Election commission officials should be able to reboot the machine and run diagnostic tools between elections. One of those tools could be an OS code checker that reads the checksum and compares it to official packages.
It’s a class thing, not an age thing. You’re naive if you think there aren’t millennials and genXers waiting to take over for the gray haired banksters of the world.
You are right, although I don’t believe for a second that generations don’t have archetypes (largely created by their environment)
True. I don't vote in Brazil because I am scared of what they can do against citizens with the voting machine data.
So if the election officials had access to the source code but it wasn't generally open source, would that be the same thing?
Wow really still on this hmmmmmm i guess so
I agree!
Openness makes it not just readable to them, but to everyone.
If they can show the public that the checksum matches, and the code shows equality, then everyone's happy.
If they keep it to themselves then they'll probably just cause too much suspicion. Why do it that way when they could fully open it up and remove that suspicion?
How does a voter know the checksum is not spoofed?
💯💯💯💯 The fact that it’s not even source viewable is suspicious as fuck
Checksums either match or they don't. To keep their election commissions from being partisan, and therefore lying about the match, they should compose their commission with equal amounts of both parties, watching each other.
Indeed! People who don't know better (government employees) think open source = not secure. But mostly, in most state governments it is about cronyism, so it is incompetence AND CORRUPTION.
INSANE, INDEED!
They are unnecessary altogether. The most secure method is paper ballot with optical scanners.
Would every voter have access to the voting machine to do that? And how do you ensure the checksum function is implemented correctly and doesn't contain a backdoor on the machine?
I love the based innocence of Alaskans. Living in a world we all seek to return to 😁
It’s insane the US has closed source, proprietary voting systems, we can’t trust or verify. Now I’m in the paper ballot with ID camp, but IF WE MUST use electronic voting, then the code should be open source.
I’m curious if someone has a technical answer to my questions, but of course, they are rhetorical in that I've asked them myself and don't have good answers; however, I try to stay humble and recognize I will never have all the answers, so I’m genuinely interested in if anyone else has good answers.
Using open-source software doesn't mean much unless you can verify that what you're running is the software. In this case, I don't think validating that voting machines are actually running open-source software is feasible. Therefore, voters must trust election officials; thus, whether the voting machine uses open-source software doesn't matter for election integrity because the result is the same: trust in election officials.
This is emblematic of Bitcoin's anomalous nature, which most still don't fully grasp: it’s a technical breakthrough solution that fixes a social problem. However, most technical solutions don't fix social problems; they fix technical problems, which means we need social solutions to social problems like election integrity.
Its a solved problem. They don't want the problem solved.
💯. If you’re voting software is closed source I assume you intend to cheat. There is nothing you can do or say to change my mind other than to make it open source.