Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Yes, exactly. Canada still does manually counting federally. It works. Ironically, it doesn't stop the complaint about bad voting machines, but that's because people get their news from the states. There are no voting machines, no way for software to fudge the numbers just enough for someone's decided candidate to win.

Is it more of an effort than trusting a machine is working correctly? Yes, absolutely, but this is the literal fundamental foundation of democracy we are talking about - let's put in a bit of effort.




On the other hand, Brazil have been electronic voting exclusively since ~2000 with no evidence of fraud/mistakes since then, AFAIK.

If it seems to be possible in a country like Brazil, why not in Canada/UK/USA?


AFAYK seems to be a big downside, AFAIK the Brazilian elections were quite "hot" ?

P.S.: Sure enough, here's an example of a "contester" :

https://www.newsweek.com/mike-lindell-hints-brazil-election-...

AFAIK not a Brazilian citizen, but this gives an example of democracy-sapping claims that are avoided with manual vote counts.


The important thing with elections isn't necessarily some abstract idea that the process itself is perfectly fair, but that people accept that it is. The process must be well known in advanced and every step auditable by all sides in real time.

It is important that the losing party can not blame the process, in order for the result to be accepted by both sides.

Brazil is as we speak a very clear example on the risks of not heeding this advice.


Fair enough, but is Brazil a target that would be valuable to destabilize by electronic tampering in its elections?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: