Spam them every way possible every American unite even the rest of the world help call the numbers and find addresses stay on them we must fight for justice let's start the 1st at home protest they listen allot more in election years that's why there keeping us distracted with all these new bs laws like SOPA we dissolved that let's tackle this b4 it's too late and were stuck with a Romney or newt genocidal felons criminals that will put sick people in jail and farmers for plant medicine that's
This years election already needs a restart and I think that the voter fraudulent party who's lobbyist caused the mess or paid them off should get disqualified and sue them for the $ to restart the election process fairly 120 diplomats can't control the entire world. They can't have America take our country back we must fight 4our freedom make a big deal out of this everyone get outraged get the videos viral call write email spam very bit of govt possible give them no time or room for any other
$ don't get stolen hacked lost that way so they keep this sketchy on purpose. I bet my absentee got lost since the winner was announced b4 it could have possibly travelled from south Fl to the Capitol several DA and AGs are investigating this election Ron Paul is loosing his delegates to Romney n newt the guy who should have been put in felony prison back when he got kicked out of congress he's not above the law arrest them both usig dead votes
Here's my idea banking systems made by the same coding companies that made these machines that suck make the same ones for banking transactions that take place all around the world 24/7 billions or more times & keep track of private $ bank accts for trillions of $s a day and never loose a penny so I don't buy that they can't make us am accurate voting system send us all A bank style card we attack maybe finger prints2 them and simply slide them through a cc style program since even the $ doesn'
Love the concept, verifiable votes, especially in light of the numerous fraudulent elections that have been documented and thus are conspiracy fact. Can't help but be skeptical as any 'computer' system can be manipulated. I am not sure that anything will replace a paper ballet and I understand this system provides a paper ballet. If a vote can NOT be verified it shall be thrown out. Also courts shall not prevent paper recounts. Secure your local election first (city, county, state).
Every candidate should publicly announce their own 4-digit code for their campaign. Candidate x says his code is 1234. Then on the ballot, there would be a legend randomy different on each ballot, e.g. 1-G, 2-Y, 3-K, 4-H, 5-E, etc thus voting GYKH would be voting for candidate x. Legends would be shredded, barcode the same, verifiable, etc if this is too complicated, people should not vote in the first place.
i must say this is just only a new level for the control freaks to maintain there control better, computer data can get manipulated just as easy as someone getting paid off to burn some votes, but this sign is only showing us that are awake,the control freaks must be getting tired of paying off there sell outs at the local levels, and so they must be wanting to save money now and that's why they moving to the digital level, greediness has reached a new level today *sigh*...
If elections were real they would be immediatly outlawed. You can go to a Chineese supported Wallmart and buy a loaf of bread they will give you a reciept and even act like gistapo demanding you prove you owne that loaf of bread before leaving the store by showing your reciept. Yet when you vote for a president you get no evidence of who you voted for so i assume it must be more inportant to prove a corporate purchase than prove a vote. Liars theives and murders maintain power. No More.
HAHAH ever hear of the two party dicktatership? They choose the candidates not us. In primary elections the vote dont matter even if it was accuratly counted. The candidates are chosed by the party leadership using so called Caucus. A trick to cheat the voter. In general elections vote dont matter the so called electorial college dictates who will be the next sole out whore puppet. If that dont work the sold out whore puppets appointed to the supreme court will choose the next whore puppet.
I was thinking the same thing on the issue of fake votes. Everyone can verify that their vote was recorded correctly but how does this system identify fake votes if the entire system is anonymous? The only way I can think of is a physical count of people who voted at each polling station.
I don't know what you mean about multiple votes for the same code? That implies different results for the same code so how would the system know to display the correct result upon verification?
@qstendious I mean, two or more guys voting for the man they don't want to win, and they have the same QR code printed in the tickets but if they never meet each other they will never know that the QR code they have is repeated.
I don't think this is a valid concern. The codes would be unique at least to each election if not completely unique. Also, at least in the UK, you have to apply to vote before you are allowed to vote.
So if for example multiple scans of the same barcode were put through, the software would remove the duplicates; and if a corrupt official attempted to fill in extra forms, the software would note that the number of votes cast is more than the number of people who applied to vote.
How does this system deal with trolls who say that their vote was changed when it really wasn't so that they can cast doubt on the legitimacy of the election. Do you think the birthers wouldn't do that?
This proposal is not SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD ENOUGH -- in a democracy you need not just transparency, but people's confidence in that transparency. This, unfortunately, takes too long too explain. We cannot expect voters to take the time to decipher and understand and appreciate this kind of a setup.
In addition, it is true that each voter can check their vote but you can't sit down and see the pile of votes for a candidate - so isn't there room for fraud in the tally as a whole?
@kenjeev The point of the proposal is to make it verifiable (better than systems right now). For example right now you voted, and you have no confidence that your vote was actually recorded (I don't trust the officials and software developers that wrote the software, because any software has bugs) but with his system, there will be a way to check that you vote was counted.
This doesn't solve the problem at all, because the problem is NOT 'a corrupt or faulty voting process,' it's corrupt politicians. Voting for pre-selected representatives, who can do whatever the hell they want once they're in office, w/out voting on EVERY decision, is NOT a democracy. Obviously we wouldn't vote for someone who we suspect to be corrupt, but the point is that they have no legal obligation whatsoever to fulfill the promoses they made to the public BEFORE they were elected!
@TVPchallenge This solves a problem of elections FRAUD, the only thing that can solve the problem with corrupt politicians is people voting for the right people, but as you know that doesn't usually happen.
1.How would you know if there would be voting more people than the ones that actually voted? The government could still add votes, and in the virtual world it would be easier, since you are mixing all the votes together of the different ballot boxes.
2.Also, how would you find your vote between the thousands of votes that may be on a web page? If you use some pattern serch engine it's obvious that they'll know how you voted.
3.What happens if the vote doesn't mach your choice (you'll lose your
Unworthy of even a 2 minute presentation, TED. The verification idea is fine, obvious and has been suggested a thousand times already. But it does little to stop the most common fraud: extra votes. Whether it's dead people voting in 1960 Chicago, extra ballots "found" 3 weeks into a recount in King County (Washington) 2002, or forged forms by ACORN employees in 2008 in several states...
Also hand-written ballots like that introduce faint marks, double-marking, misreading lines, bad scans.
As long E-vote exist, it will always be a fraud since it's so easy to access and change the answers. Plus it's more easy to hack it than it is to burn the papers and replace with cheat papers.
@obone01 The public does not care about this issue nearly enough...or politics in general...and I think you underestimate the importance of election fraud in modern society.
@dminortheory Fraudable electronic voting is already in place. The only reason this, or something like it won't happen is because those in power want to keep it. That'll only take a couple of generations to change once the knowledge of a better way is available to the public.
@sireduardo420 Maybe I am too cynical, but I am going to say that 70% of the population doesn't care about politics whatsoever and will simply follow whatever system is put in place by the power elite. It is becoming very clear that the majority of US voter are so easily tricked and fooled anyway, why not just keep rigging elections? If you attempt to discuss this issue with most people in the US you are labeled a "conspiracy theorist" and laughed at.
It could still be gamed. Yes, you have your receipt, but are you sure what the values were for? What if you think it should be person A, but the database has changed that paper so person B gets the count?
Wow, a receipt that documents whether you voted for SHIT SANDWICH D, or SHIT SANDWICH R. Awesome!!!
Our elections are nothing but an illusion of "choice". The vast majority of the candidates for any high-level Federal Government position are nothing but bribed corrupt little puppets of the corporate demon pigs. THIS IS CALLED FASCISM.
@dextrosol11 It's a 3 part encoding so it doesn't matter if someone has the last step(the reader)they can't find a particular vote without the other 2(this is digital&a random code generated when they print the ballets) that can be stored in a separate location and supervised.
In short just by having access to the reader you don't know any useful information but if you get your hands on every step of the process of course you can still cheat.Just like now.It's just more difficult like this.
Countries with first past the post will still have to change to proportional representation for votes to really count. In the last Canadian federal election for example, most candidates were not elected by a majority of voters because they only needed one more vote than their opponent.
Unfortunately doesn't stop someone with enough power and money buying off all the candidates, so it makes no difference who you vote for. That's the system we're currently in - 'Hijacked Democracy'. It's rare that our choices are allowed to make any difference. I'm not defeatist, just saying we have to be aware of the whole problem.
This "receipt" is perfect for vote buying and extortion (by say, an employer). It might not tip the scales in a nation wide election but would break havoc at the local level, public proposals, etc.
@zncdr I'd love to hear a deeper explanation of that. Sounds a bit like the beginning of a conspiracy-theory ? Vote-buying and extortion ? How would that work without people reporting it?
Vote-buying would be exactly the same. Extortion would be exactly the same. I don't see why this "receipt" would make it easier?
@ToshiroDK In a truly anonymous system there is no guarantee that the vote bought is the vote cast. This is no "conspiracy theory", vote buying has been publicly exposed several times in my country. The (poor) people claim they grab the money and then vote whomever they want.
Why do you think voting is anonymous in the first place? To (among other things) prevent economic or social pressure by allowing you to lie outside the voting poll, this system defeats the purpose.
@zncdr Okay. So in cases, such as in your country, where the society is in disorder, I can see why voting anonymously will be harder with e-voting.
But see, if stopping people from voting anonymously would mean to pressure them physically outside, then you would have to do that to a vast group of people. And if you could pressure a vast group of people outside the election like that, then your society is already in such a dire state, that voting probably wouldn't solve anything
@ToshiroDK Watch The Mormon Proposition for an example of community pressure affecting elections in a first world country. People that put up with financial inspections today will put up with voting receipt inspections tomorrow to avoid losing standing in their communities. This is just one example of community pressure and keep in mind I've been talking about city/county levels since my first post.
This is one of those great and simple ideas which makes people wonder why they hadn't come up with it first. The hard part will be convincing corrupt governments to implement it.
@Vouk73 yeah you're right, he did a better job than I would (certainly on that subject) but it still frustrated me; haven't seen it on any other TED talk .
@doloppost Well, maybe he's not as used to such situations as other TED presenters. Does it matter in the end? I think it's about the idea and the facts and not about the style of presenting them. I'm sure every single person in the audience would prefer a good idea and solid facts over a perfect, but empty and meaningless presentation.
@Vouk73 Yeah I do think it does matters. Wether or not an idea hits on, depends also on the presentation. Or would you say there is not one example in history where science suffered because of a bad presentation? Also: what one should or should not prefer is really personal, don't you think?
@doloppost Science suffers because lesser minds don't pay enough attention to it's value and/or condemn it because of stupid and often superficial beliefs. That's when science suffers. Do you think Galileo just wasn't a good presenter? Or if Einstein would have stuttered, would we think less of him?
Preference is, of course, personal, BUT there are preferable preferences, so to speak. Racism is also a preference or opinion, but that doesn't make it valid, good or reasonable. (Extreme example)
@paskal007r Neither the receipt nor the scanned online copy show the candidate next to the vote box. Every vote slip has the candidates in a different order. You would have to figure out the cryptography (not easy) to find out the candidate order on that particular slip.
If we can do voting more efficiently there is less need need to elect people to represent us, because we can vote on the issues rather than on someone we hope will decide correctly for us.
You might not mind who knows who you vote for, but maybe a Russian or other supposed democracies would be greatful if the state doesn't know who they voted for.
Currently electronic voting can be manipulated and it doesn't hurt to have a family member in charge of those machines either such as the case with Harry Reid.
This seems to be like a crap ton of trouble to go through to allow self verification of a vote. And if it is encrypted so that no one else can see how you voted, how am I to know that it counted my vote correctly? Seems pretty damn stupid to me.
@webhed003 Because the computer can read your vote and you're able to access the computer system and request the status of your vote based on the receipt you were given.
In France, we just vote the old fashioned way... and we count ourselves. So if you want to be sure counting is done correctly, you can participate. I've done it myself several times, I enjoyed it. Elections are less expensive to organize than with any other counting method, and for citizens there is no system more secure.
i still don't count this as e-voting- i want to vote without having to go to the voting booth at all...which is the primary reason many people don't vote in general. just a Gen Y perspective...
I don't understand the point of using encryption in the first place. Why not just assign each ballot a number (in some not immediately memoriseable form)?
i use my dick, stretch it to my asshole then wipe with the head, i get semi erect first so the head is hard enough to penetrate and clean out the crevis.
While this is not a comprehensive solution, it is a step in the right direction. Many problems remain. This deals on the level of the individual being able to verify their vote but doesn't do much for the big picture. For ex., while votes won't get "lost", ballot stuffing can still occur. New problems are also created such as individuals contesting their vote was recorded incorrectly (whether it was or wasn't) without any proof of their choice (as that half was destroyed).
Of course you will have individuals contesting their vote was recorded incorrectly. The point is that if someone actually tries to rig an election by switching people's votes you would stilll be able to tell because there would be MANY people contesting.
Yes, vote stuffing can still happen, but it's just as hard as vote stuffing with normal paper votes.
Something along these lines is definitely the future! Next step - remove governments completely and let the people run their own country - technocracy - look it up!
Electronic voting is flawed by the people who make the sofware and the machines that serve this purpose. So while encryption is a good idea, it also means that the people who control the encryption key is also the same people we should be protecting our votes against. This solution only makes people who don't understand encryption software feel better about the process but it does not make votes fraud proof or miscounting proof.
This system is light years ahead of the current one! I think a lot of commentors are forgetting the transparency aspect. The entire database of votes will be downloadable so that any third party can tally the votes. And you can check it for tampering by just asking a few people to compare their vote to the ones listed in the database. Seems like a tamper proof system to me.
The Ultimate computer episode of Star Trek argues against this type of thing in general. The good - making voting more accessible. The bad, in America Voting and its machinations is part of the Social Process like going to Church...in the good neighborhoods. In the bad neighborhoods and the bad neighborhoods of the World, this healthy socialization doesn't go on.
The points he seems to be outlining as important, being verifiable, secret, etc, are all reasons NOT to have e-voting. The Michigan fight song example is a good example of how far off e-voting is.
@GrudgyDiablo You're right about at least the non-existent voters issue, but don't they already have a way of finding that out? I seem to recall a news story year or two ago about that sort of thing being uncovered in an election.
This still seems full of holes. 1) The computer can obviously tell who you voted for otherwise it can't count votes so there is a way to tell how you voted, you just need a computer (and probably pretty good cryptography skills) to do so.
2) You can check your ticket, but does that mean you can check how it was read (i.e. maybe they make a program that just says ASSUME THEY VOTE FOR CAMERON).
The list really does go on for a while longer. Bruce Schneier would have a few things to say...
This would be fine with hand counting. Computers are the worst form of voting. however it's done, all it takes is one person to change a code line near the end of the program which counts the votes. The companies who make e-voting machines are extremely secretive about it.
Good idea,... but will this realy work? You still need software to decrypt the vote. If someone reprograms this software to read something else, you would be able to see if your vote has been counted for, but not if it has been counted according to your vote. So if I make a program that spits out two votes for me and just one for my opponent everytime some election worker inserts one of those papers, I will win every election!
@okonomiyaki4U If all the decryption would be done through some heavily guarded remote computer, only that computer can have the software reprogramed to change votes perhaps? That would be both good and bad I guess, since an error in the system would have such a big impact, compared to one corrupt local error or the human error in general.
@BrytaPlanka I thinks what okonoiyaki is saying is that Bismark says "no hacker can
..." blah blah..
But that is simply an invitation for hackers to take freely. And if there is one thing we know about humans, its that we will do what ever we can to prove ourselves right!
Therefore there will be hackers going out of their way to hack into this "secure" software and change votes etc. For the same reason we don't have MOD security codes in a computer in england... its a matter of RISK.
Then I have to rely on the computer to connect the correct name to the encryption. I can verify that my vote is counted, or at least that the computer visualy present my vote as counted, but not if its counted as the correct thing. The computer can count the name on position nr 2, as the name on position 1 or 3. A new problem of falsified, modified or ballots with manufacturing errors arise. Perhaps it could work if I could test and decipher the encryption when I am in the voting booth somehow.
'Our democracies cherish elections'. No, the illusion of democracy is cherished by the people with the real power. The entire political system is the fraud.
@jinitron You don't have to stay where thugs are likely to steal your car either. But the fact that crime could be avoided by moving to a different area does not excuse the crime or the criminals. A girl living in an area with lots of rapists "should have moved if she did't want to get raped", thus she is to blame, not the rapists. Reasoned like a true socialist. Stay away from other people and their property, all the rest is criminal BS. Being a parasite, you're dangerous because you're weak.
@jinitron I never asked you for anything. I don't need help and certainly not from people like you, lol. The state "made me an offer I cannot refuse" - mafia style. If you're a democrat you're a fascist, deal with it. You delegate violence onto people and you disguise it by "voting" over it, as if that bears any more relevance than doing a raindance. Murder remains murder and theft remains theft, whether or not you call it "war" or "taxation". Already answered the latter part of your BS :)
As a coputer scientist I find the claim that this is unhackable is laughable, just because a web site shows you what you are expecting to see does not mean your vote was counted that way. Sure, traditional ballots make it possible for a large number of people to conspire to steal a few votes but computerised ballots make it possible for one person to steal a whole election.
If everyone can not check who anyone else voted for, then there is no way to tell, if the data for checking your vote online and date for counting the votes is the same.
There has been e-voting available in Estonia since 2005. The security for it has been implemented by use of digital signiture, which every person has on their ID card. E-voting is definetly more secure than use of ballot boxes and counting staitions. The great idea David Bismark proposes here is that all voting data would be public and everyone can count the votes.
@mrjpvoid I'm not sure what you mean by the term "complete randomization".
I see it like this... that cryptograph thing on the paper has to be read by the software in the computer so that it can match up my X with the name that was on the other half of the page. So however the computer reads the code, I should be able to find that, and redefine how it reads everything. For instance, say the computer has a particular code for Candidate Smith and the code on my ballot says Smith is...
@mrjpvoid next to line 2. And the code for Jones is next to the code for line 3. If i can decipher the software that says that, then I should be able to change what the software says and tell it to read the code for both candidates as Smith. That way, anyone who votes for either candidate gets counted as a vote for Smith. Also, there has to be somewhere in the cache or memory or something where the count is stored. If I can access that then I can change the numbers directly, no?
@markemark1005 codes can be written that are unbreakable. Or at least unbreakable to the standard that it would take the total computing power in the entire world x # of YEARS to crack the code. Its what the speaker means when he is talking about "complicated cryptography." The computer has a key which reads the code on the paper. Without the key a hacker is reduced to attempting brute force methods of cracking the code which as I just said is not realistic. Google cryptography
We get a receipt with everything... Why not voting?
Claytonsglass 1 week ago
That's awesome!
shadypwnzz 2 weeks ago
Spam them every way possible every American unite even the rest of the world help call the numbers and find addresses stay on them we must fight for justice let's start the 1st at home protest they listen allot more in election years that's why there keeping us distracted with all these new bs laws like SOPA we dissolved that let's tackle this b4 it's too late and were stuck with a Romney or newt genocidal felons criminals that will put sick people in jail and farmers for plant medicine that's
Kronicilln3ss 2 weeks ago
This years election already needs a restart and I think that the voter fraudulent party who's lobbyist caused the mess or paid them off should get disqualified and sue them for the $ to restart the election process fairly 120 diplomats can't control the entire world. They can't have America take our country back we must fight 4our freedom make a big deal out of this everyone get outraged get the videos viral call write email spam very bit of govt possible give them no time or room for any other
Kronicilln3ss 2 weeks ago
$ don't get stolen hacked lost that way so they keep this sketchy on purpose. I bet my absentee got lost since the winner was announced b4 it could have possibly travelled from south Fl to the Capitol several DA and AGs are investigating this election Ron Paul is loosing his delegates to Romney n newt the guy who should have been put in felony prison back when he got kicked out of congress he's not above the law arrest them both usig dead votes
Kronicilln3ss 2 weeks ago
Here's my idea banking systems made by the same coding companies that made these machines that suck make the same ones for banking transactions that take place all around the world 24/7 billions or more times & keep track of private $ bank accts for trillions of $s a day and never loose a penny so I don't buy that they can't make us am accurate voting system send us all A bank style card we attack maybe finger prints2 them and simply slide them through a cc style program since even the $ doesn'
Kronicilln3ss 2 weeks ago
Love the concept, verifiable votes, especially in light of the numerous fraudulent elections that have been documented and thus are conspiracy fact. Can't help but be skeptical as any 'computer' system can be manipulated. I am not sure that anything will replace a paper ballet and I understand this system provides a paper ballet. If a vote can NOT be verified it shall be thrown out. Also courts shall not prevent paper recounts. Secure your local election first (city, county, state).
cbemerine 1 month ago
I developed a fraud proof voting system
jaso888n.deviantart(dot)com/#/d4llbz7
sketchyj 1 month ago
the more complicated the system the easier is to be corrupt :) .. and hide it ;)
Fidellio369 1 month ago
Political goal-line technology :-D
twistedbass15 2 months ago
Comment removed
luminairex 3 months ago
Every candidate should publicly announce their own 4-digit code for their campaign. Candidate x says his code is 1234. Then on the ballot, there would be a legend randomy different on each ballot, e.g. 1-G, 2-Y, 3-K, 4-H, 5-E, etc thus voting GYKH would be voting for candidate x. Legends would be shredded, barcode the same, verifiable, etc if this is too complicated, people should not vote in the first place.
objectivefreedom 4 months ago
i must say this is just only a new level for the control freaks to maintain there control better, computer data can get manipulated just as easy as someone getting paid off to burn some votes, but this sign is only showing us that are awake,the control freaks must be getting tired of paying off there sell outs at the local levels, and so they must be wanting to save money now and that's why they moving to the digital level, greediness has reached a new level today *sigh*...
bazsohamster 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fraud Free elections ? Transparent elections ?
That's why you won't find this in a near future...
kevinz1985 4 months ago
What a bout write in votes how would those work? I don't like my options and want to vote for some one else.
viperstarpoint9 4 months ago
5 star video.
truefictions 4 months ago
If elections were real they would be immediatly outlawed. You can go to a Chineese supported Wallmart and buy a loaf of bread they will give you a reciept and even act like gistapo demanding you prove you owne that loaf of bread before leaving the store by showing your reciept. Yet when you vote for a president you get no evidence of who you voted for so i assume it must be more inportant to prove a corporate purchase than prove a vote. Liars theives and murders maintain power. No More.
TheTime4solutions 4 months ago
HAHAH ever hear of the two party dicktatership? They choose the candidates not us. In primary elections the vote dont matter even if it was accuratly counted. The candidates are chosed by the party leadership using so called Caucus. A trick to cheat the voter. In general elections vote dont matter the so called electorial college dictates who will be the next sole out whore puppet. If that dont work the sold out whore puppets appointed to the supreme court will choose the next whore puppet.
TheTime4solutions 4 months ago
Finalmente un sistema electoral que parece que podría funcionar.
hidrox4 4 months ago
Most people in the US would not even understand what this man just said.
shakbazyan 4 months ago
Google Building 7
buffydog247 4 months ago
How do you know if there are not other voters with the same code counting as one and fake votes with other codes?
MrJustice01 4 months ago
@MrJustice01
I was thinking the same thing on the issue of fake votes. Everyone can verify that their vote was recorded correctly but how does this system identify fake votes if the entire system is anonymous? The only way I can think of is a physical count of people who voted at each polling station.
I don't know what you mean about multiple votes for the same code? That implies different results for the same code so how would the system know to display the correct result upon verification?
qstendious 4 months ago
@qstendious I mean, two or more guys voting for the man they don't want to win, and they have the same QR code printed in the tickets but if they never meet each other they will never know that the QR code they have is repeated.
MrJustice01 4 months ago
@MrJustice01
I don't think this is a valid concern. The codes would be unique at least to each election if not completely unique. Also, at least in the UK, you have to apply to vote before you are allowed to vote.
So if for example multiple scans of the same barcode were put through, the software would remove the duplicates; and if a corrupt official attempted to fill in extra forms, the software would note that the number of votes cast is more than the number of people who applied to vote.
Phlebas99 4 months ago
This is what I was looking for (make an e-voting verifiable) I would support that idea ! (P.S. I am a software developer myself)
DMINATOR 4 months ago
Karl Rove won't be happy..
andreszuniga88 4 months ago
Hi
I developed an online voting system.
You all welcome to try it (google consensusme)
Its easy to use , fast and secure
Yoel
yoelsharf 6 months ago
How does this system deal with trolls who say that their vote was changed when it really wasn't so that they can cast doubt on the legitimacy of the election. Do you think the birthers wouldn't do that?
Mutex50 9 months ago
So with this method, people can sell their votes?
annoloki 1 year ago
This proposal is not SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD ENOUGH -- in a democracy you need not just transparency, but people's confidence in that transparency. This, unfortunately, takes too long too explain. We cannot expect voters to take the time to decipher and understand and appreciate this kind of a setup.
In addition, it is true that each voter can check their vote but you can't sit down and see the pile of votes for a candidate - so isn't there room for fraud in the tally as a whole?
kenjeev 1 year ago
@kenjeev The point of the proposal is to make it verifiable (better than systems right now). For example right now you voted, and you have no confidence that your vote was actually recorded (I don't trust the officials and software developers that wrote the software, because any software has bugs) but with his system, there will be a way to check that you vote was counted.
DMINATOR 4 months ago
This doesn't solve the problem at all, because the problem is NOT 'a corrupt or faulty voting process,' it's corrupt politicians. Voting for pre-selected representatives, who can do whatever the hell they want once they're in office, w/out voting on EVERY decision, is NOT a democracy. Obviously we wouldn't vote for someone who we suspect to be corrupt, but the point is that they have no legal obligation whatsoever to fulfill the promoses they made to the public BEFORE they were elected!
TVPchallenge 1 year ago
@TVPchallenge This solves a problem of elections FRAUD, the only thing that can solve the problem with corrupt politicians is people voting for the right people, but as you know that doesn't usually happen.
DMINATOR 4 months ago
Comment removed
steamyrobotlove 1 year ago
(you'll lose your vote, or you'll have to expose it).
The illusion of saftey.
conchalavand 1 year ago
1.How would you know if there would be voting more people than the ones that actually voted? The government could still add votes, and in the virtual world it would be easier, since you are mixing all the votes together of the different ballot boxes.
2.Also, how would you find your vote between the thousands of votes that may be on a web page? If you use some pattern serch engine it's obvious that they'll know how you voted.
3.What happens if the vote doesn't mach your choice (you'll lose your
conchalavand 1 year ago
I was hoping for a fully electronic solution. If we could have that it would be easy to implement a direct democracy.
anthonini7 1 year ago
@anthonini7 Well first we have to develop a totally secure system, something I don't think will ever happen.
DeoMachina 1 year ago
Then recycle the paper :)
Drwray28 1 year ago
'The hard part will be convincing corrupt governments to implement it."
thatz ma nigga !!!
i live in a serbia so this kind of ideas are unimplementable....
TheCorruptedFiles 1 year ago
Unworthy of even a 2 minute presentation, TED. The verification idea is fine, obvious and has been suggested a thousand times already. But it does little to stop the most common fraud: extra votes. Whether it's dead people voting in 1960 Chicago, extra ballots "found" 3 weeks into a recount in King County (Washington) 2002, or forged forms by ACORN employees in 2008 in several states...
Also hand-written ballots like that introduce faint marks, double-marking, misreading lines, bad scans.
notme222 1 year ago
As long E-vote exist, it will always be a fraud since it's so easy to access and change the answers. Plus it's more easy to hack it than it is to burn the papers and replace with cheat papers.
wackdeafboy 1 year ago
E-voting without fraud?
Nice work if you can get it.
Pity we'd still have to vote *for* frauds.
TomFynn 1 year ago
why is all this time and money wasted on a popularity contest in the first place?
triforcelink 1 year ago
Wow, best scam ever. Fucking idiot trying to sell a flawed product.
TheCoretx 1 year ago
@TheCoretx explain
SuperAngryHippo 1 year ago
Good idea.
I hope Britain adopts this.
mabon2010 1 year ago
its probably such that the power that be don't want our votes to be verified
dankbot420 1 year ago
This isnt JUST about politics, lots of stuff gets voted on.
serioush 1 year ago
Never going to happen....not in a billion trillion years.
dminortheory 1 year ago
@dminortheory Why not? It's a great idea.
obone01 1 year ago
@obone01 The public does not care about this issue nearly enough...or politics in general...and I think you underestimate the importance of election fraud in modern society.
dminortheory 1 year ago
@dminortheory Fraudable electronic voting is already in place. The only reason this, or something like it won't happen is because those in power want to keep it. That'll only take a couple of generations to change once the knowledge of a better way is available to the public.
sireduardo420 1 year ago
@sireduardo420 Maybe I am too cynical, but I am going to say that 70% of the population doesn't care about politics whatsoever and will simply follow whatever system is put in place by the power elite. It is becoming very clear that the majority of US voter are so easily tricked and fooled anyway, why not just keep rigging elections? If you attempt to discuss this issue with most people in the US you are labeled a "conspiracy theorist" and laughed at.
dminortheory 1 year ago 21
It could still be gamed. Yes, you have your receipt, but are you sure what the values were for? What if you think it should be person A, but the database has changed that paper so person B gets the count?
katayamma 1 year ago
@katayamma
hmmm...good observation
Hewhosmokeswomen 1 year ago
Wow, a receipt that documents whether you voted for SHIT SANDWICH D, or SHIT SANDWICH R. Awesome!!!
Our elections are nothing but an illusion of "choice". The vast majority of the candidates for any high-level Federal Government position are nothing but bribed corrupt little puppets of the corporate demon pigs. THIS IS CALLED FASCISM.
Narniak69 1 year ago
@Narniak69
I sense you live in the US ;)
drummerponsi 1 year ago
Can't someone just get a hold of the "reader" of the 2D codes and thus be able to figure out what someone voted for?
dextrosol11 1 year ago
@dextrosol11 It's a 3 part encoding so it doesn't matter if someone has the last step(the reader)they can't find a particular vote without the other 2(this is digital&a random code generated when they print the ballets) that can be stored in a separate location and supervised.
In short just by having access to the reader you don't know any useful information but if you get your hands on every step of the process of course you can still cheat.Just like now.It's just more difficult like this.
juditK2007 1 year ago
Countries with first past the post will still have to change to proportional representation for votes to really count. In the last Canadian federal election for example, most candidates were not elected by a majority of voters because they only needed one more vote than their opponent.
cyclingzealot 1 year ago
Unfortunately doesn't stop someone with enough power and money buying off all the candidates, so it makes no difference who you vote for. That's the system we're currently in - 'Hijacked Democracy'. It's rare that our choices are allowed to make any difference. I'm not defeatist, just saying we have to be aware of the whole problem.
globalbankfraud 1 year ago
Guys... what would it take to get our governments to accept this system?
DonTronDK 1 year ago
america should vote on the pokittics of people rather than personality alone.
ThaEther 1 year ago
This "receipt" is perfect for vote buying and extortion (by say, an employer). It might not tip the scales in a nation wide election but would break havoc at the local level, public proposals, etc.
zncdr 1 year ago
@zncdr I'd love to hear a deeper explanation of that. Sounds a bit like the beginning of a conspiracy-theory ? Vote-buying and extortion ? How would that work without people reporting it?
Vote-buying would be exactly the same. Extortion would be exactly the same. I don't see why this "receipt" would make it easier?
ToshiroDK 1 year ago
@ToshiroDK In a truly anonymous system there is no guarantee that the vote bought is the vote cast. This is no "conspiracy theory", vote buying has been publicly exposed several times in my country. The (poor) people claim they grab the money and then vote whomever they want.
Why do you think voting is anonymous in the first place? To (among other things) prevent economic or social pressure by allowing you to lie outside the voting poll, this system defeats the purpose.
zncdr 1 year ago
@zncdr Okay. So in cases, such as in your country, where the society is in disorder, I can see why voting anonymously will be harder with e-voting.
But see, if stopping people from voting anonymously would mean to pressure them physically outside, then you would have to do that to a vast group of people. And if you could pressure a vast group of people outside the election like that, then your society is already in such a dire state, that voting probably wouldn't solve anything
ToshiroDK 1 year ago
Comment removed
zncdr 1 year ago
@ToshiroDK Watch The Mormon Proposition for an example of community pressure affecting elections in a first world country. People that put up with financial inspections today will put up with voting receipt inspections tomorrow to avoid losing standing in their communities. This is just one example of community pressure and keep in mind I've been talking about city/county levels since my first post.
zncdr 1 year ago
What about write-ins?
axelasdf 1 year ago
This is one of those great and simple ideas which makes people wonder why they hadn't come up with it first. The hard part will be convincing corrupt governments to implement it.
XionXi 1 year ago 63
@XionXi An idea so sensible that it will take only, oh, a century or so to implement it.
1Weemaryanne 1 year ago
@XionXi
even if the idea was brought up do you really think they would apply it ? specialy those in power who stand to loose alot from this voting mechanism.
romeoneverdies 1 year ago
I would want to see this being implemented
emperor3000 1 year ago
as much as i would love a efficient voting system - as soon as you generate data the game is lost... can't stop the signal
fatalmystic 1 year ago
Woaw he has such an interesting charisma
xilliah 1 year ago
and who runs the servers?
fatalmystic 1 year ago
Stop reading your notes! If your talk is any bit important, you'd know it by heart.
doloppost 1 year ago
@doloppost Yeah, all scientists and thinkers are used to talk in front of hundreds of people...
Vouk73 1 year ago
@Vouk73 yeah you're right, he did a better job than I would (certainly on that subject) but it still frustrated me; haven't seen it on any other TED talk .
doloppost 1 year ago
@doloppost Well, maybe he's not as used to such situations as other TED presenters. Does it matter in the end? I think it's about the idea and the facts and not about the style of presenting them. I'm sure every single person in the audience would prefer a good idea and solid facts over a perfect, but empty and meaningless presentation.
And so should you.
Vouk73 1 year ago
@Vouk73 Yeah I do think it does matters. Wether or not an idea hits on, depends also on the presentation. Or would you say there is not one example in history where science suffered because of a bad presentation? Also: what one should or should not prefer is really personal, don't you think?
doloppost 1 year ago
@doloppost Science suffers because lesser minds don't pay enough attention to it's value and/or condemn it because of stupid and often superficial beliefs. That's when science suffers. Do you think Galileo just wasn't a good presenter? Or if Einstein would have stuttered, would we think less of him?
Preference is, of course, personal, BUT there are preferable preferences, so to speak. Racism is also a preference or opinion, but that doesn't make it valid, good or reasonable. (Extreme example)
Vouk73 1 year ago
@doloppost you do realize that statement makes no sense, right?
JaeEffingKae 1 year ago
@JaeEffingKae I know I know, I just got frustrated by his continuous note reading, I couldn't finish the presentation.
doloppost 1 year ago
@paskal007r Neither the receipt nor the scanned online copy show the candidate next to the vote box. Every vote slip has the candidates in a different order. You would have to figure out the cryptography (not easy) to find out the candidate order on that particular slip.
rocker341dan 1 year ago
@rocker341dan
Then we are in case B:
Case B)If I can not read which candidate I voted for
My vote may be given to another candidate without me even knowing it.
paskal007r 1 year ago
@DarrenBeaumont It's to prevent vote bullying. You can pay or threaten someone to vote a certain way, but they cant prove that's the way they voted.
GorgonLuvs8008135 1 year ago
If we can do voting more efficiently there is less need need to elect people to represent us, because we can vote on the issues rather than on someone we hope will decide correctly for us.
GorgonLuvs8008135 1 year ago
i dont get it, its too complicated
matchbox555 1 year ago
@DarrenBeaumont
You might not mind who knows who you vote for, but maybe a Russian or other supposed democracies would be greatful if the state doesn't know who they voted for.
DontTouchMyVicodin 1 year ago 2
if i can use the paper to verify my vote then:
Case A) If I can read which candidate I voted for I can (be forced to) give the paper to a third person that can check how I voted-> secrecy breaked
Case B)If I can not read which candidate I voted for
My vote may be given to another candidate without me even knowing it.
I see a fallacy there.
paskal007r 1 year ago
Currently electronic voting can be manipulated and it doesn't hurt to have a family member in charge of those machines either such as the case with Harry Reid.
frankcoffee 1 year ago
This seems to be like a crap ton of trouble to go through to allow self verification of a vote. And if it is encrypted so that no one else can see how you voted, how am I to know that it counted my vote correctly? Seems pretty damn stupid to me.
webhed003 1 year ago
@webhed003 Because the computer can read your vote and you're able to access the computer system and request the status of your vote based on the receipt you were given.
Radjehuty 1 year ago
@webhed003
You use the receipt's bar code to match it up with the ballot you filled out using the web.
grimcity 1 year ago
If voting ever changed anything of importance, it would be outlawed.
-- Chompsky
saadasim 1 year ago
In France, we just vote the old fashioned way... and we count ourselves. So if you want to be sure counting is done correctly, you can participate. I've done it myself several times, I enjoyed it. Elections are less expensive to organize than with any other counting method, and for citizens there is no system more secure.
MatthieuWalraet 1 year ago
I don't vote, in SA it does not matter.
Blooper1980 1 year ago
Transparent and verifiable elections? I don't see how that will ever be allowed.
fluffymcdeath 1 year ago
i still don't count this as e-voting- i want to vote without having to go to the voting booth at all...which is the primary reason many people don't vote in general. just a Gen Y perspective...
MrCorragio 1 year ago
what a waste of paper
eduhsu 1 year ago
@eduhsu Fucking recycling, how does it work?
psychonavigator 1 year ago
I don't understand the point of using encryption in the first place. Why not just assign each ballot a number (in some not immediately memoriseable form)?
Paulginz 1 year ago
Comment removed
noman858 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
wipe my arse/
soyousay18 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i use my dick, stretch it to my asshole then wipe with the head, i get semi erect first so the head is hard enough to penetrate and clean out the crevis.
soyousay18 1 year ago
While this is not a comprehensive solution, it is a step in the right direction. Many problems remain. This deals on the level of the individual being able to verify their vote but doesn't do much for the big picture. For ex., while votes won't get "lost", ballot stuffing can still occur. New problems are also created such as individuals contesting their vote was recorded incorrectly (whether it was or wasn't) without any proof of their choice (as that half was destroyed).
masamuneMK5 1 year ago 2
@masamuneMK5
Of course you will have individuals contesting their vote was recorded incorrectly. The point is that if someone actually tries to rig an election by switching people's votes you would stilll be able to tell because there would be MANY people contesting.
Yes, vote stuffing can still happen, but it's just as hard as vote stuffing with normal paper votes.
Paulginz 1 year ago
Yes! Go Bismark.
Vormav666 1 year ago
Something along these lines is definitely the future! Next step - remove governments completely and let the people run their own country - technocracy - look it up!
FlyingFish112 1 year ago
This doesn't solve the issue of ballot stuffing as far as I can tell.
mtrat 1 year ago
Electronic voting is flawed by the people who make the sofware and the machines that serve this purpose. So while encryption is a good idea, it also means that the people who control the encryption key is also the same people we should be protecting our votes against. This solution only makes people who don't understand encryption software feel better about the process but it does not make votes fraud proof or miscounting proof.
GeofsFilms 1 year ago
This is an amazing idea!!!
sedatedlovex 1 year ago
An elegant solution. Well done. Let's have this in the UK now please....(ducks as flying pig almost hits him)
BozzerFace 1 year ago
Go to 3:20 to get to the point.
illtrax 1 year ago 43
@illtrax
thanks
yared94 1 year ago
This system is light years ahead of the current one! I think a lot of commentors are forgetting the transparency aspect. The entire database of votes will be downloadable so that any third party can tally the votes. And you can check it for tampering by just asking a few people to compare their vote to the ones listed in the database. Seems like a tamper proof system to me.
willandmeling 1 year ago
Only a seven-minute video but half spent telling us what we already knew.
kinsmed 1 year ago
The Ultimate computer episode of Star Trek argues against this type of thing in general. The good - making voting more accessible. The bad, in America Voting and its machinations is part of the Social Process like going to Church...in the good neighborhoods. In the bad neighborhoods and the bad neighborhoods of the World, this healthy socialization doesn't go on.
theflorgeormix 1 year ago
We won't see it implemented in any country in the near future.
Why? Because it's expensive?
Absolutely not, today's method of counting voted is a lot more expensive.
Why then?
Because someone WANTS to leave it as it is now?
I'll leave this question unanswered
zydomason 1 year ago 2
The points he seems to be outlining as important, being verifiable, secret, etc, are all reasons NOT to have e-voting. The Michigan fight song example is a good example of how far off e-voting is.
check537 1 year ago
Interesting, but there are still questions..what about tampering with counting machines?
yadranko 1 year ago
@GrudgyDiablo You're right about at least the non-existent voters issue, but don't they already have a way of finding that out? I seem to recall a news story year or two ago about that sort of thing being uncovered in an election.
1acroyear1 1 year ago
This still seems full of holes. 1) The computer can obviously tell who you voted for otherwise it can't count votes so there is a way to tell how you voted, you just need a computer (and probably pretty good cryptography skills) to do so.
2) You can check your ticket, but does that mean you can check how it was read (i.e. maybe they make a program that just says ASSUME THEY VOTE FOR CAMERON).
The list really does go on for a while longer. Bruce Schneier would have a few things to say...
apfelgarden 1 year ago
This would be fine with hand counting. Computers are the worst form of voting. however it's done, all it takes is one person to change a code line near the end of the program which counts the votes. The companies who make e-voting machines are extremely secretive about it.
doford 1 year ago
My point is that the voter also should be able to dechiper the balletform in the votebooth, before handing it over to someone else to decipher it.
BrytaPlanka 1 year ago
Good idea,... but will this realy work? You still need software to decrypt the vote. If someone reprograms this software to read something else, you would be able to see if your vote has been counted for, but not if it has been counted according to your vote. So if I make a program that spits out two votes for me and just one for my opponent everytime some election worker inserts one of those papers, I will win every election!
okonomiyaki4U 1 year ago
@okonomiyaki4U If all the decryption would be done through some heavily guarded remote computer, only that computer can have the software reprogramed to change votes perhaps? That would be both good and bad I guess, since an error in the system would have such a big impact, compared to one corrupt local error or the human error in general.
BrytaPlanka 1 year ago
@BrytaPlanka I thinks what okonoiyaki is saying is that Bismark says "no hacker can
..." blah blah..
But that is simply an invitation for hackers to take freely. And if there is one thing we know about humans, its that we will do what ever we can to prove ourselves right!
Therefore there will be hackers going out of their way to hack into this "secure" software and change votes etc. For the same reason we don't have MOD security codes in a computer in england... its a matter of RISK.
slickhaircut 1 year ago
Then I have to rely on the computer to connect the correct name to the encryption. I can verify that my vote is counted, or at least that the computer visualy present my vote as counted, but not if its counted as the correct thing. The computer can count the name on position nr 2, as the name on position 1 or 3. A new problem of falsified, modified or ballots with manufacturing errors arise. Perhaps it could work if I could test and decipher the encryption when I am in the voting booth somehow.
BrytaPlanka 1 year ago
Great talk, great topic, hoping to see something like this in the near future.
johnpatcher 1 year ago
'Our democracies cherish elections'. No, the illusion of democracy is cherished by the people with the real power. The entire political system is the fraud.
This guy needs to rub the sand from his eyes.
flyhead2 1 year ago
awsome idea!!
Poisonfrogg 1 year ago 2
More smart things coming from a Swede
:)
maggru91 1 year ago
@jinitron You don't have to stay where thugs are likely to steal your car either. But the fact that crime could be avoided by moving to a different area does not excuse the crime or the criminals. A girl living in an area with lots of rapists "should have moved if she did't want to get raped", thus she is to blame, not the rapists. Reasoned like a true socialist. Stay away from other people and their property, all the rest is criminal BS. Being a parasite, you're dangerous because you're weak.
NietzscheanMan 1 year ago
@NietzscheanMan
You're the parasite. You take (army, roads, police, clean environment), but don't want to give (taxes).
Go find an island in the middle of the pacific and start your own 1 man country, you freak.
jinitron 1 year ago
@jinitron I never asked you for anything. I don't need help and certainly not from people like you, lol. The state "made me an offer I cannot refuse" - mafia style. If you're a democrat you're a fascist, deal with it. You delegate violence onto people and you disguise it by "voting" over it, as if that bears any more relevance than doing a raindance. Murder remains murder and theft remains theft, whether or not you call it "war" or "taxation". Already answered the latter part of your BS :)
NietzscheanMan 1 year ago
Comment removed
NietzscheanMan 1 year ago
Comment removed
NietzscheanMan 1 year ago
Comment removed
NietzscheanMan 1 year ago
who dislikes this? dats just stupid
Mtihc 1 year ago
As a coputer scientist I find the claim that this is unhackable is laughable, just because a web site shows you what you are expecting to see does not mean your vote was counted that way. Sure, traditional ballots make it possible for a large number of people to conspire to steal a few votes but computerised ballots make it possible for one person to steal a whole election.
Tapecutter59 1 year ago
If everyone can not check who anyone else voted for, then there is no way to tell, if the data for checking your vote online and date for counting the votes is the same.
cruuudd 1 year ago
Comment removed
Tapecutter59 1 year ago
There has been e-voting available in Estonia since 2005. The security for it has been implemented by use of digital signiture, which every person has on their ID card. E-voting is definetly more secure than use of ballot boxes and counting staitions. The great idea David Bismark proposes here is that all voting data would be public and everyone can count the votes.
cruuudd 1 year ago
Wouldn't call representative democracy as "democracy" at first place, so fixing the election system wouldn't fix anything anyhow. Useless.
CapMurd 1 year ago
With a paper vote, me or my representative can put our own eyes on the vote. We can count them and know if they are all there.
With this system, I have to trust the computer counted correctly, and I have _no_ way to verify that it did.
Check out the Open Voter Consortium for a better solution, though one with less electronical goodness.
sachamm 1 year ago
The tricky part is we would have to vote to get this better way of voting.
genedhr 1 year ago 2
You can almost feel the ruling class of the world shuddering.
celshader 1 year ago 49
This has been flagged as spam show
@celshader This man will be shot soon I reckon
eskimokid 1 year ago
@celshader that's why it will take decades to implement
maillort 1 year ago
This won't solve stupidity, though.
MrFrankBullitt 1 year ago
excellent idea
slackologist 1 year ago
Wake the fuck up. Voting is just a suggestion box for an enslaved people.
HigherPlanes 1 year ago
You'll never see a system like this in the US
Election fraud is good for business
Jeridiculous 1 year ago 2
OMG, YES???!!
Segee 1 year ago
Brilliant
LuciousVBogeymanProd 1 year ago
short and sweet!
strawprophet 1 year ago
Hell yes. What a great system. Now let's wait to hear what's wrong with it from "democratic" governments around the world...
eatingperson 1 year ago
Absolutely brilliant! I want verifiable elections.
miraeguk 1 year ago
good, only of the govt wants to take this up!!
yourtube20061 1 year ago
Very interesting concept Mr. Bismark. Unfortunately, it is completely hackable just like everything else in the digital world.
Here's a very simple truth... Any software you can write or system you can come up with can be reverse engineered then altered at will.
The worst case scenario for the hacker is that he or she will have to access your native code and alter the code itself.
If I reverse engineer this cryptography, I can change which name goes with which box.
markemark1005 1 year ago
@markemark1005 how about complete randomisation? you cannot reverse-engineer that.
mrjpvoid 1 year ago
@mrjpvoid I'm not sure what you mean by the term "complete randomization".
I see it like this... that cryptograph thing on the paper has to be read by the software in the computer so that it can match up my X with the name that was on the other half of the page. So however the computer reads the code, I should be able to find that, and redefine how it reads everything. For instance, say the computer has a particular code for Candidate Smith and the code on my ballot says Smith is...
markemark1005 1 year ago
@mrjpvoid next to line 2. And the code for Jones is next to the code for line 3. If i can decipher the software that says that, then I should be able to change what the software says and tell it to read the code for both candidates as Smith. That way, anyone who votes for either candidate gets counted as a vote for Smith. Also, there has to be somewhere in the cache or memory or something where the count is stored. If I can access that then I can change the numbers directly, no?
markemark1005 1 year ago
@markemark1005 codes can be written that are unbreakable. Or at least unbreakable to the standard that it would take the total computing power in the entire world x # of YEARS to crack the code. Its what the speaker means when he is talking about "complicated cryptography." The computer has a key which reads the code on the paper. Without the key a hacker is reduced to attempting brute force methods of cracking the code which as I just said is not realistic. Google cryptography
rileyo629 1 year ago