Thursday, February 19, 2009
Computer Reliability and Online Voting
The discussions of computer reliability and network security are important to consider when further pondering whether or not this concept of online voting is something we should continue to invest our time and efforts into. With regards to computer reliability, sure instances of having a glitch in the system have been corrected in the past by producing updated versions of a system (for example the case with Windows or the Therac-25). But, these glitches would never have been found had the programs not been put to use. When voting for the president of the United States, this isn’t exactly something people are willing to gamble with by using a machine that is possibly still in its “trial and error” phase. Furthermore, it took time to update Windows 95 and remove all the viruses. Could we potentially have elected officials in office for an entire term before finding out they hadn’t actually won the election? This seems to potentially threaten the legitimacy of American democracy and the concept of popular sovereignty. I know someone made the point in class that we are willing to allow potentially erred systems to run things like power plants, which is a good point. But as someone else also stated, it isn’t often that people try and tamper with things like that. People are, however, very passionate about their leader. There were documented instances of violence that arose from heated debates over Obama and McCain. You think these people wouldn’t try and alter the election in a heartbeat were they given the chance to? The high probability of individuals tampering with an electronic voting system would require a system that was next to perfect. Is that possible when using computer systems, and do we really think it ever will be possible? Sure older methods like vouchers seem obsolete, but sometimes the old phrase “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” makes a good point. Aside from the logistics of potential computer error or lack of computer security, you also have to consider the demographic of people that will be isolated from the vote. I know people spoke a lot about the elderly being isolated from online voting, but we must also consider other demographics of people that will be left out of the vote by making it online, namely the poor. It was brought to our attention that historically the vote was made difficult, so that only certain individuals ended up voting. For the sake of progress, we want today’s vote to reflect people all of all ethnicities, gender, sexual-orientation, etc. Certain poor regions are marked by the very demographic of people that we want to make a point to include in today’s vote (I’m a psych major and have been studying this a lot in my poverty and development course). People in these areas have a hard time getting access to grocery stores and banks, let alone computers. I know this last point wasn’t as much related to the concept of computer reliability, but I think it is still very important!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think it is hard for us as college students to picture a life without the Internet, and therefore we are biased into thinking Internet voting would be very convenient. However, not all Americans have access to the Internet, and as both Olivia and the class pointed out, it would make voting harder for many Americans. I believe the most important obstacle to Internet voting currently is the accessibility issue rather than security or reliability threats.
ReplyDeleteI personally think scanning technology is best for right now. Individuals can vote by hand and then scan their votes into a computer to tabulate results. This way there is also a paper trail for re-count situations. Security and reliability threats for scanning technology is more important than for Internet voting.
I agree with mapeck that the fact that we’re all college students had a huge impact on our discussion the other day. We’re mostly in our 20s and have been using computers since elementary school and are therefore fairly tech-savvy. We all also have access to computers 24 hours a day. From dealing with Student Central and Blackboard, we should all also be painfully aware of how imperfect computer systems can be.
ReplyDeleteInternet voting is not where our government’s time and energy should be placed. First of all, any Internet voting system would be incredibly expensive and difficult to securely construct, all for use AT MOST one day a year. And since private companies, not government officials, develop these systems, neutrality (putting favored candidates at the top of the list, for example) is hard to guarantee. I think the most compelling argument against Internet voting is one that was raised in class, there’s no way to check identification to ensure whoever’s voting is who they say they are. How could this possibly be controlled? You might suggest social security numbers, but these numbers are hardly private – your dentist, your insurance company and your employer all have it somewhere and who’s to stop someone from any of these offices from casting your vote? I just think its unfeasible and a complete waste of money. Optical ballots may be imperfect, but at least everyone is familiar with and able to use the interface. It’s not too much to ask that people take a little time out of their day to drive to a polling location and pencil in a few circles. Yes, Internet voting would increase voter turnout, but it’s not worth the risks involved. If every state allowed one-stop early voting and registration like North Carolina does, voting would be less of a hassle and turnout would therefore improve. Yes, Internet voting would make voting easier for voters in rural areas and voters who are older, but these are also the demographics least likely to have access to computers/the Internet.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhat I find most troubling about e-voting is the level of security that exists for these systems at this time. Sure, nothing is truly secure, and even critical computer systems can be hacked, but the e-voting machines are far more susceptible to a security breach as they currently have some form of hardware on-site. I can recall leading up to this years election reading articles about how easy it would be for someone to go in to a voting booth with a tiny USB flash drive and alter some of the system files on a Diebold voting machine. Apparently it was as easy as opening up a latch on the case, plugging in your USB drive and flipping a switch to set the machine to boot from that drive. It doesn't seem too far-fetched to imagine someone changing a vote machine on the spot and helping their candidate out. Even if it isn't nearly that easy, the mere fact that the public could be lead to believe that the elections have been rigged could cause a general distrust in the election process. If internet voting is ever going to be 'secure', it seems that the hardware will need to be far away from where a voter could potentially access it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with a lot of the arguments Olivia made. One thing that sticks out in my mind with online voting is this: do the benefits outweigh the costs? When looking at this issue closer, I do not think they do. The main reason I see that supports online voting is that people believe it could make our voting system more efficient. However, I do not think that our voting system can be much more efficient. For example, look at this past presidential election where Obama was declared the winner at 11 pm on the day of the elections. To be able to forecast the results of such an important issue is incredibly efficient. Overall, I do not think online voting will make our voting system more efficient when it is compared to the actual costs of inputting such a system.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Internet voting should not be instituted as an election system in its current form, but I think the issue has more to do with security than accessibility. We could've done a better job explaining it in our presentation, so to clarify, one of the most prominent proposals for Internet voting is a system that would incorporate both remote access voting (voting from home) and stand-a-lone polling venues (like traditional polling sites). Both systems would rely on the Internet, but citizens would have the option of voting from home or voting at kiosks that would be in convenient locations like grocery stores and government buildings. Even if that helps the accessibility issue (and it very well could not) I think the biggest obstacle facing Internet voting is security. There have been numerous tests that indicate Internet voting is at extremely vulnerable to hacking. The Secure Electronic Registration and Voting Experiment done by the Department of Defense in 2004 said that Internet voting (as of that year) should be abandoned because its security systems were too flawed. In addition, many Americans already feel that their information is not safe on the Internet. I think this mistrust would transfer to Internet voting and it would compromise the legitimacy of elections.
ReplyDeleteThere is such a large margin of error when you think about implementing an Internet-based voting system. The system itself may be exposed to glitches, hackers, among other obstacles. Its convenience, however, would be an enormous benefit to the election system. It would encourage people to vote by removing some of the cost associated with it, taking the time and making the effort to vote that is required in its current form.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, voting is a privilege and people who want to exercise that right should have the burden some of the cost. Millions of people have died for our country. Taking the time out of your day to vote is a small price to pay. The numerous opportunities for biased results are a cost that a democratic election does not need to burden.
Voting is a privilege and it should be made as easy as possible. By allowing people to vote online, voter turnout would increase enormously and more people will get involved. Since the country can't require people to spend money on voting, it cannot require people to own computers. this is easily fixed by allowing people to go to libraries to vote if they don't own a computer, similar to going to the polls today. Also many people are worried about voter fraud, but if we look at the system currently, the risk for voter fraud is just as high. You don't have to show any form of identification in order to vote. Voting from home already occurs in some states, like Iowa, who has a system of mail-in voting. Voting over the internet is not as far away as it seems, and is most likely the future of voting in America.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Olivia's post, I believe that if voting was to go online then the Government would make sure that it was physically accessible by all demographics, or at least they should. If this way of voting was ever implemented, I feel that polling places would no longer take place in school cafeterias and gyms. Instead they would move to school computer labs so that everyone would still have the same opportunity to vote. As far as convenience goes, those with computer access at home would probably be able to choose. However, I am not sure that I think this would be an ideal method for choosing our government leaders. After reading the text about how unreliable computers have been in the past, I would worry about hackers with political motives, and failure of the software itself to be 100% accurate for every vote. I would also argue that today's elderly may not have the technological capacitance for this way of voting, but if this system was ever implemented 20 or 30 years down the road the elderly in that time period, our parents, may be better equipped. Overall, though I agree that I like the optical scanners. They seem to be the most straight forward and user friendly. Although it is interesting how we trust that those machines work 100% of the time, when, like most machines their margin of error is probably higher than we think!
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with some of the comments that state that accessibility is a greater issue when it concerns internet voting. How can accessibility compare to rigged voting? Voting is probably the most important right we have as Americans and is taken for granted in many cases. The internet is by far more hacker prone than our current system of voting; therefore, switching to internet voting would place the entire Democracy in jeopardy. In my opinion, having a hard copy is a necessity. Now having optical scanning is acceptable but that hard copy has to be there in case anything wrong happens in the voting process. Convenience is one thing, but laziness is a whole separate issue and thats where I think internet voting comes in. Going to a poll is incredibly easy and if you really care enough about electing your next President, then laziness shouldn't be factored in when trying to make things more convenient. I know that comment may be offending people who support the internet as a voting instrument, but you really have to consider the importance of the process. A lot of countries do not have this privilege so it is essentially a sacred right.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Olivia's post, and everyone else who pointed out that computer systems have the ability to get hacked: You're right, there may be a much larger incentive to hack a presidential election than say, a nuclear power plant. But how about a financial system? How about every bank and financial institution in the country? Surely you would agree that the monetary incentive is indeed a compelling one. These systems can and do get hacked, yet without batting an eye, every last one of you are willing to risk your entire net worth on their security.
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying that a successful internet voting system would be easy to implement, but if there is anything "undemocratic" that should be in discussion here, having the ability to increase voter turnout of American citizens yet opting not to, should be.
After reading all of the responses to Olivia’s post I think the latter of the class sees the future of voting in the hands of the internet. While of course yielding the greatest amount of voter turnout is the goal and ultimate benefit of e-voting, I feel as though we have a long way to go to have the entire country on a system not 100% flawless. Until we perfect such an innovation, I think we should stick to the systems existent and implemented today. As Nirav stated earlier, voting is probably one of the most important right we have as American citizens and any chance of jeopardizing that right should be illegal. The act of voting is special; it is a community event and brings a sense of accomplishment and belonging after you participate. I think it is safe to assume that the majority of voters who make the effort to get to the polls on Election Day, at the very least, care enough about politics and are making an educated decision. If voting is as easy as the click of a button, how many uninformed citizens will vote?
ReplyDeleteThe issue of access to voting is a historic problem as mentioned in class. I find it interesting that people aren't bringing up the issue of legality of online voting because it incurs a cost upon the voter, which is illegal in the United States because of past voting laws.
ReplyDeleteLooking at e-voting though, we shouldn't just rely on "if it ain't broke, then don't fix it" because the system is flawed. We have mis-elected numerous presidents in the US over the past 200 years and Bush was not the first and nor will he be the last. I'm not sure how we can ever make e-voting machines entirely secure but I wouldn't rule out R&D in the cause.
Many thanks to NJ for coming up with a better example than I could in class. I find it ironic that many in this class, who are completely comfortable with their entire lives - including finances, communications, utilities, and national security - being directed by "hackable" computer systems would be so opposed to electronic voting for security reasons. As NJ pointed out, there is a huge financial incentive to break into banking systems, yet every single one of us is completely comfortable with our nation's financial networks being orchestrated in the digital arena. Let's not overlook the potential benefits to e-voting in terms of access and convenience (some of the reasons we do finance online) just on the potential security threats, which are also inherent to finance.
ReplyDeletePeople keep bringing up accessibility and potential costs as issues when it comes to e-voting, but there is no reason to eliminate polling places just because voting can be done over the internet. This would only change accessibility for people who already own a computer but don't bring themselves to go to a polling station to vote. This does raise the question of how easy we really want it to be to vote. Historically, there are blocks in place, and it may be time to remove these constraints and make voting as easy as possible. On the other hand, this does need to wait until there is a feasible and secure e-voting plan.
ReplyDeleteThe transition to online voting would not be as abrupt as you make it sound. Sure elderly and poor people would not be able to use the online voting, but I feel like the methods will not instantly convert to online methods. At first they should start off with the online version as an option along with traditional voting. It isn’t realistic to think that traditional voting is going to continue forever, either. They will eventually make a new voting process, so they should concentrate on perfecting the online voting to be as reliable as possible. Sure there may be more people passionate about politics and choosing their leader than they are with messing up power plants, but that does not mean online voting needs to be more reliable than power plant programs. People may not tamper with that often, but it doesn’t take multiple attempts to ruin an unsecured system. Every new method is going to have flaws, so people should accept that yet still give it a try. Improvements cannot be made without mistakes being made first.
ReplyDeleteOriginally I was against online voting when the idea was mentioned because I think its important to vote in a professional scene. When I say a professional scene I am talking about the many locations that are closed and set up for people to go vote around all over. I also don't think that online voting is fair to an entire population as the elder and poor who are not familiar with computers or may not even have one miss out on voting. Plus older people are some of the most patriotic people in the country so for them not to be able to vote would be very terrible. With that said and after reading many of the posts a slow and gentle transition to online voting might be the best idea. I would still worry about leaving something so important like an election in the hands of a computer.
ReplyDeleteThe future direction of voting seems to inevitably involve the internet. Society as a whole seems to have many problems with trust, whether with political systems, corporate entities or even their own neighbors. Voting has always been a valued right to many Americans and combining this right with an unreliable internet system could be disastrous. Hollywood as produced many recent movies showing such possibilities. Such films display bribery, corruption and self-interest as possible outcomes of combining a private software system with the voting process. Until every possible quirk is alleviated, I think it is imperative to stick with the current voting system. High voter turn-out is difficult in itself, much less if trust in the system was compromised.
ReplyDeleteMany people look to the fact that the elderly do not know how to use computers as a case against online voting. However, we will soon reach a point where all living generations will have had a tremendous impact by the personal computer and the Internet. If there are ways to prevent any huge malfunctions (hacking, etc.) from online voting, I am positive that this will be the direction that will be taken.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of the imperfections of computers...
ReplyDeleteI know personally I have experienced this firsthand. My computer always seems to crash during the worst times, the day before an exam/paper is due or during exam week teaching me about the imperfection of computers. Its crazy to think about the dependence our generation has on technology. Like in class when we talked about how most of us would feel "naked" without their cell phone on them. When it comes to online voting, obviously our generation would not have an issue with it since just about everything we do now involves technology, more specifically the internet. The point made about elderly, as well as the possible malfunction with online voting. That is so scary to think that could actually happen. However, just like 's patel' said if we can get beyond these imperfections and learn from there then I am most certain that online voting will be the next step for our country's future.
Voting is a privilege and a right, and too many people fought hard to gain that right to complain about its 'inconvenience'. Voting is a special privilege that should not be taken lightly or be changed to make it 'convenient'. E-voting is fine for student elections at UNC, but for national and political elections it should stay with the traditional. We should use reliable forms of voting, but E-Voting would bring in unreliable possibilities and corruptions that we have battled hard against. I do not think that E-voting should even be a thought for political elections.
ReplyDeleteI think e-voting is a risky way to go. Maybe one day when the older generation has been with computers their whole lives, but right now there are too many people who do not know how to use computers or do not feel comfortable with the concept.
ReplyDeleteThis is a step that one day will have advantages like not having to leave home, not having to wait in line, larger access. But currently there are too many voting people which even with a user-friendly interface would not feel comfortable voting online.
This also would be harder to protect from hackers, and people trying to rig elections. This seems to me like it would cost a lot to monitor and therefore negate many of the savings from e-voting.
I agree that this reliability issue if very important in terms of e-voting and other issues that require high levels of security and accuracy. People will risk a lot to influence the outcome of an election and putting a slightly unreliable system out there is just asking for someone to tamper with it.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that it is important to think about the issue of equal access and e-voting. As it stands now, there are many people without easy access to computers and it would be unconstitutional to implement a system that excluded these citizens. In the future, however, it will be different. More and more people will have access as time goes on, and the older generations that have difficulty with these systems will be replaced with generations that are more familiar with them.