The problem we have in building a honest and reliable voting network is that we’ve got a couple of opposing goals.
First of all, we’d really like to be able to test that every single vote arrived in it’s appropriate bucket, and no single user voted more than once. These things would seem, on the surface, to require some form of good authentication and user-tagging.
But on the other hand, we really want users to feel free to vote their concience, without worrying that other people might find out what they’ve voted. This would seem to require a completely anonymous system.
Then there’s the matter of tallying the votes. Ideally, we would like each vote to be sent several places for tallying, rather than tallied at one place, and the results of the tallies compared.
I really think that, especially given that this is new technology that will by its very nature be buggy, and in some sense at least the fate of the world rests on the results of this system (one could argue that that’s true of any system because everything is so interconnected, but I think in this case it’s more true than in most) we need the ability to verify our votes after they have been posted. This will require us to have some way to authenticate ourselves to the network – I’m thinking something like a ATM card, issued to every voter, with their name and SSN encoded on it. It could probably even just be a magstripe on a conventional ID like a drivers license.
Anyway, some completely anonymous (as far as any outside snoop could see) token should be either assigned to or generated out of the name and SSN, and attached to the ‘envalope’ of the ballot. That way the user could go home and with their web browser, hit up www.whatdidIvote.gov and verify that their vote was in fact sitting there, and had been counted.
Also, because this is completely new technology, I think it’s important that it be open-source. The open-source community would probably rally around a project to build a voting machine network that was honest using nothing but PCs, and because it was open-source it would be possible to verify that it had not been coded to favor any particular canidate in any way.
[At the moment, the situation we have is that the vice president of the u.s. has stock in the government-favored electronic voting machine company Diebold.. if anyone knows of something that smells more of conflict-of-interest than that, please don’t tell me about it because I’m really afraid to know]
Bleh. Must go shower. More later.