the covid hoax demonstrated scott adams to be a massive faggot.
the covid hoax demonstrated scott adams to be a massive faggot.
Heh, pretty much.
Heh, pretty much.
Scott has been based at least since he was at lucent in the 90's
Scott has been based at least since he was at lucent in the 90's
theres a whole animated show of dilbert about them designing a voting machine, do finally might not be the right word
theres a whole animated show of dilbert about them designing a voting machine, do finally might not be the right word
I agree with this.
Secure Electronic Voting using solutions that have been tested and verified by 3rd Parties, however, is the safest way to vote.
Unsolved problem: registering to vote is still the weakest link in the chain and even the world's best Secure Electronic Voting solutions cannot fix that problem. But it does make for impossible to crack votes - casting and counting votes is impossible to crack.
Multiple solutions exist.
Ask yourself why NIST lied to Congress when asked if we should adopt Secure Electronic Voting? I read NIST's 90 page report. Almost every single "problem" NIST identified is wrong and relies on a false understanding of any modern Secure Electronic Voting solution (and they did this on purpose).*
Here's why: if all of the computers on the planet would take 100+ trillion years to crack the secure electronic voting system, it cannot be manipulated, it cannot be changed. With nonrepudiation measures at every step of the way, any single attempt would cause an alarm and error clearly indicating tempering or falsification attempts. This isn't conducive to anyone in power who wishes to be able to gently nudge results in elections.
And for those of you who ignorantly think Secure Electronic Voting (the ones that have been tested, legitimately) is insecure, there are various multi-million dollar bounties available for anyone who can crack them. Not a single one, that has passed the 3rd party assessments, has had the bounty collected, yet.
*Even assuming Moore's Law keeps pace, it will still be 105 years before exponential growth in computing power can crack these systems in less than a year. Did the math, myself. People trying to commit voting fraud will not wait that long to commit it.
I agree with this.
Secure Electronic Voting using solutions that have been tested and verified by 3rd Parties, however, is the safest way to vote.
Unsolved problem: registering to vote is still the weakest link in the chain and even the world's best Secure Electronic Voting solutions cannot fix that problem. But it does make for impossible to crack votes - casting and counting votes is impossible to crack.
Multiple solutions exist.
Ask yourself why NIST lied to Congress when asked if we should adopt Secure Electronic Voting? I read NIST's 90 page report. Almost every single "problem" NIST identified is wrong and relies on a false understanding of any modern Secure Electronic Voting solution (and they did this on purpose).*
Here's why: if all of the computers on the planet would take 100+ trillion years to crack the secure electronic voting system, it cannot be manipulated, it cannot be changed. With nonrepudiation measures at every step of the way, any single attempt would cause an alarm and error clearly indicating tempering or falsification attempts. This isn't conducive to anyone in power who wishes to be able to gently nudge results in elections.
And for those of you who ignorantly think Secure Electronic Voting (the ones that have been tested, legitimately) is insecure, there are various multi-million dollar bounties available for anyone who can crack them. Not a single one, that has passed the 3rd party assessments, has had the bounty collected, yet.
*Even assuming Moore's Law keeps pace, it will still be 105 years before exponential growth in computing power can crack these systems in less than a year. Did the math, myself. People trying to commit voting fraud will not wait that long to commit it.
>Secure Electronic Voting using solutions that have been tested and verified by 3rd Parties, however, is the safest way to vote.
This is false. The closest to a secure voting system is a paper ballot.
>>Secure Electronic Voting using solutions that have been tested and verified by 3rd Parties, however, is the safest way to vote.
This is false. The closest to a secure voting system is a paper ballot.
This is explicitly false, what you just said.
We just went through an election where, potentially, tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands, of paper ballots were prefilled and counted.
This is impossible with secure electronic voting - 1 vote, 1 person, 1 identity, and the voter has control over that identity.
This is explicitly false, what you just said.
We just went through an election where, potentially, tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands, of paper ballots were prefilled and counted.
This is impossible with secure electronic voting - 1 vote, 1 person, 1 identity, and the voter has control over that identity.
Here are a few reasons why 1 vote, 1 person, 1 identity CANNOT EVER BE safe:
a) 1 vote, 1 person, 1 identity ALWAYS means that you can tie an individuals identity to their vote. Any voting system that cannot be guaranteed to be secret ballot cannot be gurataneed to be free.
The reason that is true is the single master key problem. In an electronic system, a single master key can NOT ONLY match the identities to the votes eliminating any and all possibilities of ever having a secret ballot, a single master key can change votes instantly AND cover all of their tracks forever. And, yes, blockchain cannot solve the issue because a single master key can just wipe out the original blockchain and replace it in a fraction of a second with one that is altered to favour the parties. For every cryptographically sound solution you will bring up in response to this, I will be able to proposed a method to subvert it without ever having to break the cryptography.
Please note that if you start to argue that the code should be open source, I agree. However, I will require you to argue that all of the firmware, virtualization layers AND all schematics for all pieces of hardware will need to be open sourced and verifiably confirmed as valid representations of the hardware it represents, because both of us know that the people that own the virtualization layers on cpus, operating systems on cpus, TPM chips, firmware on the nic cards and never mind the insertion of middle men in chip form on to the motherboard bus are THE REAL PEOPLE THAT CONTROL THE ELECTION. Not the os, not the software counting the votes and writing them to a public blockchain, not the sysadmins, not the owners of the companies making the vote counting machines and most certainly not the voters.
In other words, what you meant to write is that the only thing that has been verified secure is a veeeeeeeeery thin layer of software and processes sitting on top of a morass of an ecosystem underneath that HAS NOT AND CANNOT BE VERFIED in any shape, method or form.
b) The only method that we know of that allows for reasonable guarantee of a secret ballot is the paper vote. The reason for this is that even with multiple master key access, there is no way to discard all of the votes and replace them with new ones. All that you can do is pollute the vote. In addition to that, the evidence is ALWAYS MATERIAL and never ephemeral, which means, a normal person WITHOUT any special training can audit the vote, and the vote can be audited publicly while remaining a slient vote in order to guarantee freedom of opinion.
Or to put it another way, those that own the voting computer own the caluclations used to count the votes. Or, to put it yet another way, the reason the last election was so easily stolen was that the computers allowed for syadmins to go in after the election and change / delete evidence, go in during the vote and adjoudicate votes and then delete the evidence AND on top of that, take all of your paper ballots in a few vans in the back and shuffle them through the computerized scanners (as opposed to humans) and do it so quickly as not to even hold anyone up.
You are incorrect.
Here are a few reasons why 1 vote, 1 person, 1 identity CANNOT EVER BE safe:
a) 1 vote, 1 person, 1 identity ALWAYS means that you can tie an individuals identity to their vote. Any voting system that cannot be guaranteed to be secret ballot cannot be gurataneed to be free.
The reason that is true is the single master key problem. In an electronic system, a single master key can NOT ONLY match the identities to the votes eliminating any and all possibilities of ever having a secret ballot, a single master key can change votes instantly AND cover all of their tracks forever. And, yes, blockchain cannot solve the issue because a single master key can just wipe out the original blockchain and replace it in a fraction of a second with one that is altered to favour the parties. For every cryptographically sound solution you will bring up in response to this, I will be able to proposed a method to subvert it without ever having to break the cryptography.
Please note that if you start to argue that the code should be open source, I agree. However, I will require you to argue that all of the firmware, virtualization layers AND all schematics for all pieces of hardware will need to be open sourced and verifiably confirmed as valid representations of the hardware it represents, because both of us know that the people that own the virtualization layers on cpus, operating systems on cpus, TPM chips, firmware on the nic cards and never mind the insertion of middle men in chip form on to the motherboard bus are THE REAL PEOPLE THAT CONTROL THE ELECTION. Not the os, not the software counting the votes and writing them to a public blockchain, not the sysadmins, not the owners of the companies making the vote counting machines and most certainly not the voters.
In other words, what you meant to write is that the only thing that has been verified secure is a veeeeeeeeery thin layer of software and processes sitting on top of a morass of an ecosystem underneath that HAS NOT AND CANNOT BE VERFIED in any shape, method or form.
b) The only method that we know of that allows for reasonable guarantee of a secret ballot is the paper vote. The reason for this is that even with multiple master key access, there is no way to discard all of the votes and replace them with new ones. All that you can do is pollute the vote. In addition to that, the evidence is ALWAYS MATERIAL and never ephemeral, which means, a normal person WITHOUT any special training can audit the vote, and the vote can be audited publicly while remaining a slient vote in order to guarantee freedom of opinion.
Or to put it another way, those that own the voting computer own the caluclations used to count the votes. Or, to put it yet another way, the reason the last election was so easily stolen was that the computers allowed for syadmins to go in after the election and change / delete evidence, go in during the vote and adjoudicate votes and then delete the evidence AND on top of that, take all of your paper ballots in a few vans in the back and shuffle them through the computerized scanners (as opposed to humans) and do it so quickly as not to even hold anyone up.
You are incorrect.
(post is archived)