I don't like the outcome of the
election, but I do. I don't, because of my politics. I do, because we
had a pretty much indisputable result, without guns, hanging chads,
or Diebold fraud accusations.
I've been around computers so long my
first program was written in Wang Basic, and the first computer I had
at home was a Tandy TRS-80, and I don't think that e-voting fills the
requirements of democracy. It's an efficient vote counter that steals
the process from the citizen.
So what are my requirements
for electronic voting?
- Anonymous
The
system has to be as anonymous as Australia's current electoral
system. No “proof of ID” at the polling place, because that opens
the door to intimidation. Yes, there is a gateway to fraud, but it's
so minor that in 30 years, Australia has never had a seat result
overturned in the High Court (which has the Court of Disputed Returns
jurisdiction) because of fraud.
- Open to scrutineers
The
computer system has to be as open to scrutineering as the current
system. That is: every party that wishes to argue over the intent of
the voter, must have the same opportunity in the future system.
- Accurate
The
system has to record every voter's intent accurately. If the voter
intends to cast an
informal vote, it has to be recorded as such without
penalty. Which goes back to
“anonymity”. If the elector intends to drop a blank ballot in the
box, so be it.
- Secure
In
case you haven't noticed, security is a thing at the moment. Snowden,
the NSA and all that? And no, I don't believe freedom-from-spooks was
so great even before the Snowden leaks.
- Accessible and inclusive
Every
single step of the electoral process in Australia can be understood
by anyone who can tell the number 1 from the number 2. That's not
everyone, but we have a system which, by world standards, is
astonishingly inclusive. If you can work shoelaces, recite the
alphabet, and you're considered not a danger to the system, you're
probably eligible to take part in the process.
It's
easy to make systems that are usable by the electors. But in
Australia, you don't need “special sauce” to be part of the
process.
Right
now, if there was an enormous sunspot that destroyed every computer
on the planet, Australia's process
would survive. The whole thing could be handled manually (albeit
slowly), and at the end of it, there would be reasonable confidence
in the final result. Because the process is so simple:
- I enter the polling place, and my name is checked off on a list
- I vote and stick my ballot in a box that's supervised by AEC officials
- At the end of the day, they tabulate votes.
- The disinterested (AEC vote counters) are watched over by the interested (party scrutineers)
- The count is reported
And
after the count is reported, the AEC then re-checks everything (which
is how the “Indi error” was found), not on the assumption of
fraud, but on the assumption of error.
- Verifiable
Everyone
has to verify that what was supposed to happen, happened.
Other
bits of the process
Meanwhile,
other officials cross-check the voter lists (with computers but it
could be done on paper if necessary) to detect if someone's name was
checked off at more than one location.
And
there's still other
ways to detect fraud – if not a specific instance, a trend
suggesting fraud can be discovered with statistics. Psephologists are
well-versed in identifying anomalies in trends, saying “we think
this booth was gamed”, because they have a long experience in
analysing swings, even big ones.
I
truly believe in democracy – and it only works if every elector has
the opportunity to participate in any given stage of the process.
To
take any part of the process, and exclude electors from it, is to
turn electors into passive recipients of the offerings of others.
I have
a great regard for meritocracies such as the IETF. That body has
bestowed on the world an Internet that works.
Think
of it like this: democracy is a meritocracy in which “merit”
means “functioning citizen”.
Democracy
means everyone is included, everywhere. Regrettably, it might even
include people we think are idiots because they can't read code or
solve a DNS issue without help. It doesn't matter: democracy doesn't
just mean “everyone votes”, it means “everyone know how voting
works”.
In
Australia, voting works. It has imperfections and holes and one of
the reasons exploits fail is that the system
is sound and trusted.
Geeks
– or vendors – have no right to appropriate part of the process
to themselves. If you can't give both the ballot paper and
the electoral process to those
you disdain, you're not a democrat.
No comments:
Post a Comment