OTTAWA – A smug man from Canada wasted no time this morning chastising Americans for re-electing terrifying liar and felon Donald Trump, despite the fact that he plans to vote for terrifying liar and asshole Pierre Poilievre in the next Canadian election.
Matt Hunter, a 36-year-old barista, took time away from attending a Poilievre rally to rant about how stupid Americans were for falling for Trump’s fascist bullshit.
“I just can’t believe that someone could look at a petty asshole running on slogans, lies, and faux outrage and think, ‘Yeah, this guy will be good for the country,’” Hunter laughed, taking a quick second to repost an “Axe the Tax, Build the Homes, Fix the Budget, Stop the Crime” tweet on X. “It makes no sense. Luckily we up here in Canada have more common sense. Pierre says so.”
“When Poilievre becomes Prime Minister next year, he’s gonna stand up to Trump. They’re so different in ways that I can’t even describe. Don’t even ask me what those ways are. Just trust me, bro. He’ll bring Canada home again.”
wave that’s literally me minus the research into electronic voting systems in particular. do not implement voting systems in software. see my initial response. its not about the technical underpinning of if we could. This isn’t a discussion. literally every person worth their weight in the space will tell you the same thing.
its the in-feasibility of doing it well and its completely unnecessary. our current system is more than sufficient using paper ballots that prevent all sorts of fuckery and are auditable. its impossible to hack a paper ballot without a ton of effort manual and physical access. its incredibly easy to hack counting machines and any electronic implementation and it only takes 1 mistake to expose everything.
there is absolutely zero reason to expose voting systems to a digital threat vector and the loss of the paper audit trail would be catastrophic for verification.
The current system gives you the best of both worlds, easy counting and a verifiable paper trail for verification after the initial counts are in. quick answers and incredibly hard to game.
Which is why researchers of electronic voting defend the use of Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT).
But anyway, “this isn’t a discussion” is consistent with statements like “there is absolutely zero reason to expose voting systems to a digital threat vector” so I guess there are things we seem to agree on.
And any researcher who is advocating for the paper trail should trivially realize that soon as you add that, then you literally have the system we have today with counting machines and we dont need to invite all the issues with electronic voting.
As i said take it from people who actually write software as a career. We’re literally telling you its not worth the effort/risks.
It’d be prohibitively expensive and borderline impossible due the fact you’d need to audit hundreds of millions of lines of code.
We’re literally telling you to not pay us to do that work because its a bad idea.
As I do… but I’d rather not take it from software engineers because we are not experts. I’d rather listen to real experts, the folks who research this topic as their career.
Noted.
smile then you’re simply clueless. Send me your sources I’ll tear down your supposed experts if it gets you to stop spreading this nonsense
Interesting. Which claim would you be interested in reading the sources?