timcmay at got.net
Fri Nov 21 10:53:57 PST 2003
On Nov 21, 2003, at 10:12 AM, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:
> On Friday 21 November 2003 12:19, Tim May wrote:
>> On Nov 21, 2003, at 8:16 AM, Major Variola (ret.) wrote:
>>> Secretary of State Kevin Shelley is expected to announce today that
>>> of 2006, all electronic voting machines in California must be able to
>>> produce a paper printout that voters can check to make sure their
>>> are properly recorded.
>> Without the ability to (untraceably, unlinkably, of course) verify
>> this vote is "in the vote total," and that no votes other than those
>> who actually voted, are in the vote total, this is all meaningless.
> Quite true. But given the fact that we don't have that ability *now*,
> exactly is the difference? Other than streamlining and centralizing
> present distributed corruption?
The point being that this "electronic voting" is just "syntactic
sugar," superficial glitter.
None of the interesting and robust foundations from crypto are being
(Not that I am necessarily advocating this.)
For the next ten years there will be endless babble on television about
"the revolution of electronic voting," when in fact it's just a g-job
to give voting machine companies some new business.
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy