Posted on 09/11/2016 11:47:57 AM PDT by Hostage
"Postal service wants to begin with small corporate and civic elections before ramping up to handle a full parliamentary election."
Australia Post is looking to move into the business of running elections, and plans to use the blockchain as a central pillar of its plan.
In a submission to the Victorian Electoral Matters Committee, the government-owned postal service said community expectations were driving the push towards digital voting, and it would be looking to put its prior work with blockchain to use.
"The emergence of crypto currencies on the technology known as blockchain have highlighted opportunities to repurpose that technology to capture various digital transactions in immutable, distributed and secure ways," Australia Post State Director, Victorian Government and Tasmania, Tim Adamson, said in the submission.
(Excerpt) Read more at zdnet.com ...
Banning electronic voting altogether by federal law will likely be impossible because it infringes on state laws and rights.
However, totaling votes and sending them across state lines in a national vote is an interstate issue and should have a legal basis in the Commerce Clause. Thus, Block-Chain Technology should have a legal context for passing a federal law requiring its implementation.
It won't matter for this election. Although Hillary's health has finally come into the clear, her possible replacement will still have the democrat machine and uniparty support forging ahead with every war strategy they have been preparing over the many years since before Obama was elected.
Or you could just temporarily revert tp paper ballots, picture ID and voter rolls purging.
How about putting it in your lexicon this organization, “True The Vote” ?
I can post it here if you want.
Absolutely pathetically terrible idea. Just look at how many times crypto “banks” have been hacked. Yeah, let’s grossly unproven highly fallible technology to completely run our elections without any ability to verify the vote. BRILLIANT!
You would fight local election officials who would cry and whine that they purchased these expensive machines and they can’t afford all the election workers and managers to go back to paper only.
The problem is those who want these hackable machines will fight in state courts to keep them. They will claim the machines are certified at the source and there is no threat. But that is false, and has been proven false.
The most important fact is the machine can hide what it’s doing. An analogous question is are we willing to hand our ballot to a person behind a curtain who promises to record our vote faithfully? Hell no!
Block-Chain Tech (BCT) can take it across state lines so that a federal law can be passed to require such tech. This is why we should learn and be aware of this tech.
I predict that if Donald Trump wins and in 2017 Americans wake up and cause Congress to pass an election reform law to mandate among other things implementation of Block-Chain Technology, that the democorrupt media with its Uniparty support will spew nonstop stories about how BCT is weak, flawed, hackable, etc. This is why it is important to keep an eye on Australia’s experience.
But even more, BCT has a track record with Bitcoin where it was conceived. Not only that but any technical-minded programmer or engineer can review the principles of BCT and quickly realize it makes great sense.
I already know about them.
Was there not a write-up that the the voter machines cannot be hacked that came out a few days ago?
You got the context wrong. The hacks have not been in the area of the Block-Chain transmissions.
In a nutshell, the Block-Chain transmits random batches of vote totals so that voters, poll-watchers and exit polls can monitor what’s going on. That either keeps the system honest or flagged for fraud.
If a station is flagged for fraud, the procedure can call for a default paper tally only with witnesses.
I knew there would be trolls coming out of the woodwork proclaiming BCT would be such a threat. I just posted on it and here is the first instance of the screaming troll behavior on this subject.
For those reading, you should now know that the Australians are on the right path. You need only look to what is happening on this thread.
There’s been many writeups of such things and they are all proven wrong by many sources including Princeton University and myriad organizations that have performed tests that are conclusive in that such machines are easily hacked even when ‘certified’ at their source.
Here’s just one way to easily hack an electronic voting machine which is very disturbing but is by far not the only means nor the most effective means:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t75xvZ3osFg
Doesn’t matter. The system IS hackable, is PROVEN to be hackable, and is therefore a BAD IDEA.
When crypto goes 5 years with ZERO hacks it’ll be time to begin to consider the possibility that MAYBE the system might someday be secure enough for this. Until then all this amounts to is letting the side with the best hackers win the election.
Not trolling. Just pointing out the truth. And if you think the truth is trolling then that shows us just how little confidence even you have in the idea. So now that we both agree this is a terrible idea, we can move on.
I already saw that quite a while back and posted at length on that thread. I was called out by several longtime Freepers in support because they know the game has evolved to be a real threat now.
Whereas in the past, vote fraud has been witnessed (including in a court case I sat in on), and it has been witnessed to steal elections (I witnessed at the Governor level), it has never approached the systematic widespread influence IN THE HANDS OF A FEW with the capability to cause untraceable tampering.
Unfortunately, in this case, technology has not stayed still. The advances in technology have made it easy for a few persons to know what is going on and there are no witnesses.
In Kuhner’s report, I highlighted how a few criminals can dispatch memory cards to key precincts across many states carried by election officials who have no clue what is on the cards they are carrying.
Hacking Block Chain Tech would be discovered quickly in real-time. That keeps the system honest or under a light.
What you are referring to is the hacking of Bitcoin accounts which have nothing to do with the Block-Chain Tech.
If you disagree, post a credible source that shows that hacks to Block-Chain Tech are hidden and not discoverable. You can’t do that because it would be like saying an auto driver can go 120 mph on a freeway without being detected by a team of state troopers who all have a radar gun pointed at the speeding vehicle.
You can say drivers can exceed the speed limit, but you can’t say they exceed the limit and never be detected.
With Block-Chain Tech any cheating is immediately detected.
Somewhere along the lines there won’t be block chain. At that point the system can be hacked. If you go to a national system all you’re doing is making it so that instead of voter having to be done all over the place it’s in one centralized location. Your BEST case scenario is you have a completely hackable voter database that feeds into your supposedly unhackable block chain that feeds into a completely hackable voting count. Even if claims of the perfection of BCT are accurate (not proven) if you feed it garbage in the voter database it doesn’t even need to be hacked, because you’ve setup a system that WELCOMES bad data.
That is why TURNOUT will be very important for Mr. Trunp and it has to be BIG.
You control your private key and that is what is used to vote. Some malware could possibly decrypt and sign with your private key or capture it after you decrypt it in the interval where is clear. But that problem, protecting the private key, is being solved by the cryptocurrency people.
Once your signed transaction with your vote is on the blockchain it can't be hacked. The blockchain is immutable, can't be changed or altered. It is also public, although for privacy, the validation of the vote count would be complicated.
Your BEST case scenario is you have a completely hackable voter database that feeds i
Thats true, although that's registration, not a database. There is no database, but there are addresses of voters that are allocated one vote a piece. If someone impersonates several people and gets several addresses that is a registration problem. Blockchain does not solve that. But keep in mind there is no database to hack. The allocation of credentials to vote is on the blockchain which cannot be hacked.
Who hands out the private keys? How are we verifying they’re going to legitimate voters? They don’t need to capture anything if they can just make voters up.
If you’re handing out private keys it’s a database. There has to be some list of voters that get keys, that list is hackable.
Yes, it’s true that the ‘system’ (meaning electronic voting machines) can be hacked. Now you’re catching on.
But you’re wrong when you say there won’t be a blockchain at some point. That statement you made reveals you do not know how the blockchains work.
Each node in the blockchain receives data from a machine or a hand tally continuously in realtime so they can be cross-checked. The hand count can tally say 10 votes and be entered on a public data node whereas the electronic machine total of the same votes can also be transmitted to another node. If they don’t agree, the counting stops and an investigation is made. And this can be done continuously or at any random time. Thus, a hacked machine can never know how to be in sync with the hand check.
Then extending to uploaded totals to district-wide or county-wide, the conforming totals are stored on many nodes that must all agree or the uploads are stopped and an investigation is made.
Block-Chain Tech catches inconsistencies immediately and stops the process dead in its tracks.
Here’s another explanation of how it works:
https://followmyvote.com/online-voting-technology/blockchain-technology/
I didn’t say there’s wouldn’t be a blockchain at some point. I said there wouldn’t be a blockchain in the POINT THAT MATTERS.
Your own model shows the problems. If there’s a hand count that can be faked, block chain doesn’t matter. Basically at that point you’re putting a whole bunch of technology to “secure” data that’s faked the same way it’s been getting faked for hundreds of years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.