European Parliament Elections 2019

Zubeneschamali

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's an important prerequisite for any IT project to have a clear definition of what problem you are trying to solve - what is the problem here?

After a Commission here rejected the machines on security grounds, Dutch hackers successfully hacked the same machines in Holland by replacing some eproms. Here's a video - 3 guys can swap the proms in 60 seconds. Then the machine will give any result you like.

So the machines, used 1 day every what, 3 years? Have to be under 24/7 guard the rest of the time, and transported securely, and never left unguarded at a polling station after they are moved there.



We spent €50m on the system, €3m storing it in mothballs for years and sold it all for scrap for €70K.


All to solve the "problem" that our election counts take a while.

AndrewJRenko

Laois_Man wrote: »

With Blockchain technology, they can't be (although you never know what might be possible with future quantum computing capabilities)

And how do you prevent DOS or similar attacks on the blockchain server on polling day? And how do you allow the voter to verify their own vote without enabling vote selling and duress voting?

And yet again, what problem would be solved?

AndrewJRenko

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

All true. As I said I've never been at a count.

Who brings the ballots to the centre? Guards? Couldn't they be bought?

Bought how? How could they reproduce the ballot box seals and the ballot paper stamps in the time it takes to drive across town? How would the Garda know what boxes they are going to be transporting? And will there be a member of the polling staff with them that also needs to be bought?

VinLieger

golfball37 wrote: »

The delays counting South and MNW are getting to embarrassing levels now at this stage. Its 5 days since we voted.

Whats emabrassing about it? We are one of a small minority in Europe (NI and Malta being the only others) who uses PR-STV, its simply more complex to count however at the same time is far more representative than most other voting systems.

If anything its something to be proud of.

ednwireland

Rebelbrowser wrote: »

Bit of a broken record here but the lack of reporting on Ireland South is unbelieveable. RTE's (meagre) online coverage is all about the midlands north west consitituency. On the news this morning RTE just called out those coming 1 to 5 in the Ireland South vote (only one elected so far, no one else anywhere near) and suggested those 5 would take the seats - eventhough there is a strong chance one of 6 or 7 will overtake. Not wanting to be one of those guys but if this was a Dublin constituency do you think they would be treating it like this?

even in the MNW constiuency its not easy to find regular updates as to whats happening,

once the 'green surge' disappeared rte seemed to lose interest.

absolutely terrible coverage they seemed to lose interest in the locals on sunday afternoon as well.

VinLieger

ednwireland wrote: »

even in the MNW constiuency its not easy to find regular updates as to whats happening,

once the 'green surge' disappeared rte seemed to lose interest.

absolutely terrible coverage they seemed to lose interest in the locals on sunday afternoon as well.

Best way to keep track is search midlands-north-west on twitter, theres some local media who are quick to update with results there

is_that_so

ednwireland wrote: »

even in the MNW constiuency its not easy to find regular updates as to whats happening,

once the 'green surge' disappeared rte seemed to lose interest.

absolutely terrible coverage they seemed to lose interest in the locals on sunday afternoon as well.

Green surge was predominantly locals and they wrapped up. MNW counts are just slow. Last one should be in by early this evening. Just pray nobody wants a recount!:o

bren2001

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

After a Commission here rejected the machines on security grounds, Dutch hackers successfully hacked the same machines in Holland by replacing some eproms. Here's a video - 3 guys can swap the proms in 60 seconds. Then the machine will give any result you like.


So the machines, used 1 day every what, 3 years? Have to be under 24/7 guard the rest of the time, and transported securely, and never left unguarded at a polling station after they are moved there.



We spent €50m on the system, €3m storing it in mothballs for years and sold it all for scrap for €70K.


All to solve the "problem" that our election counts take a while.

Why couldn't we have an electronic voting machine where it prints each vote on a ballot paper, the user verifies it and it is stored in a ballot box.

This would give a physical backup to verify the e-count. The physical ballot could be printed in a way to allow for an electronic counter to speed up the process and verify it.

is_that_so

bren2001 wrote: »

Why couldn't we have an electronic voting machine where it prints each vote on a ballot paper, the user verifies it and it is stored in a ballot box.

This would give a physical backup to verify the e-count. The physical ballot could be printed in a way to allow for an electronic counter to speed up the process and verify it.

It's an awful lot of money to spend on a problem , which is really just a lack of patience.

markodaly

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So no answer to the 'so what' question then? Let me try again - what specific problem arises from a count taking 5 or 7 days.

It's an important prerequisite for any IT project to have a clear definition of what problem you are trying to solve - what is the problem here?

The fact that we have to spend a week counting votes is a problem.

As I already mentioned, if counting votes by hand is not a problem, then why do other countries use e-voting machines, other countries use machines to count paper ballots and other countries like South Korea are investigating blockchain voting.... what 'problems' are they trying to solve.



No one designed the iPhone or created blockchains to solve an IT Project 'problem', but their use and application evolve every day.
What 'problem' will 6g try and solve...?

I'll say it again for the third time, are we the only country in the EU 27 still counting votes?
If so, what are the others doing that we are not?

VinLieger

markodaly wrote: »

The fact that we have to spend a week counting votes is a problem.

No you've only said its a problem, you've given no reasons why its a problem beyond you being impatient.

markodaly wrote: »

As I already mentioned, if counting votes by hand is not a problem, then why do other countries use e-voting machines, other countries use machines to count paper ballots and other countries like South Korea are investigating blockchain voting.... what 'problems' are they trying to solve.

None of them use PR-STV

markodaly wrote: »

I'll say it again for the third time, are we the only country in the EU 27 still counting votes?
If so, what are the others doing that we are not?

They do not use PR-STV

markodaly

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And it was explained to you the other day that this question nicely encapsulates the core difficulty of eVoting - electronic bits and bytes can be changed without leaving evidence. That's the huge danger that we're dealing with here.

You work in IT but never heard of blockchain?
What exactly do you do in IT? Work at a helpdesk?

is_that_so

markodaly wrote: »

The fact that we have to spend a week counting votes is a problem.

As I already mentioned, if counting votes by hand is not a problem, then why do other countries use e-voting machines, other countries use machines to count paper ballots and other countries like South Korea are investigating blockchain voting.... what 'problems' are they trying to solve.



No one designed the iPhone or created blockchains to solve an IT Project 'problem', but their use and application evolve every day.
What 'problem' will 6g try and solve...?

I'll say it again for the third time, are we the only country in the EU 27 still counting votes?
If so, what are the others doing that we are not?

4 days, not a week. They couldn't start counting in the Euros until Sunday. India takes well over two weeks.

Danzy

markodaly wrote: »

The fact that we have to spend a week counting votes is a problem.

As I already mentioned, if counting votes by hand is not a problem, then why do other countries use e-voting machines, other countries use machines to count paper ballots and other countries like South Korea are investigating blockchain voting.... what 'problems' are they trying to solve.



No one designed the iPhone or created blockchains to solve an IT Project 'problem', but their use and application evolve every day.
What 'problem' will 6g try and solve...?

I'll say it again for the third time, are we the only country in the EU 27 still counting votes?
If so, what are the others doing that we are not?

Do you use the phrase "the whole thing has gone very bad" at least once a week?

markodaly

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And how do you prevent DOS or similar attacks on the blockchain server on polling day? And how do you allow the voter to verify their own vote without enabling vote selling and duress voting?

You do not know how blockchain works.

Danzy

The Germans use paper, the Dutch used voting machines but got rid of them and returned to pencil and paper for obvious reasons.

markodaly

VinLieger wrote: »

Whats emabrassing about it? We are one of a small minority in Europe (NI and Malta being the only others) who uses PR-STV, its simply more complex to count however at the same time is far more representative than most other voting systems.

If anything its something to be proud of.

Irish exceptionalism *puke*

The merits of PR-STV can be debated at length, but let's not try the old 'pull on the green jersey' cliche.

is_that_so

Danzy wrote: »

The Germans use paper, the Dutch used voting machines but got rid of them and returned to pencil and paper for obvious reasons.

Most countries also use lists, which are a whole lot faster to count as is the UK FPTP.

Danzy

markodaly wrote: »

Irish exceptionalism *puke*

The merits of PR-STV can be debated at length, but let's not try the old 'pull on the green jersey' cliche.

Lol, self pity dripping off you.

Can you now stop derailing the count thread with whatever ramblings or obsessions you have.

VinLieger

markodaly wrote: »

You do not know how blockchain works.

I dont believe you do either bar having heard it might be used for e-voting and that its more secure than current options

markodaly wrote: »

Irish exceptionalism *puke*

The merits of PR-STV can be debated at length, but let's not try the old 'pull on the green jersey' cliche.

Still avoiding the question of why the length of time it takes to count our votes is a problem i see, this time with cheap straw man posts

Danzy

is_that_so wrote: »

Most countries also use lists, which are a whole lot faster to count as is the UK FPTP.

There are advantages and disadvantages to lists as well, which are off pointed out in those countries.

Speed of counting being so small as to not be part of either column, not far up anyway.

AndrewJRenko

markodaly wrote: »

You do not know how blockchain works.

So educate us all - show us how blockchain is the solution here please.

AndrewJRenko

markodaly wrote: »

Irish exceptionalism *puke*

The merits of PR-STV can be debated at length, but let's not try the old 'pull on the green jersey' cliche.

It's not a jersey. It's a fact.

We use PR-STV and others don't.

AndrewJRenko

bren2001 wrote: »

Why couldn't we have an electronic voting machine where it prints each vote on a ballot paper, the user verifies it and it is stored in a ballot box.

This would give a physical backup to verify the e-count. The physical ballot could be printed in a way to allow for an electronic counter to speed up the process and verify it.

Why should we?

AndrewJRenko

markodaly wrote: »

The fact that we have to spend a week counting votes is a problem.

As I already mentioned, if counting votes by hand is not a problem, then why do other countries use e-voting machines, other countries use machines to count paper ballots and other countries like South Korea are investigating blockchain voting.... what 'problems' are they trying to solve.



No one designed the iPhone or created blockchains to solve an IT Project 'problem', but their use and application evolve every day.
What 'problem' will 6g try and solve...?

I'll say it again for the third time, are we the only country in the EU 27 still counting votes?
If so, what are the others doing that we are not?

Let me rephrase it so - what benefit arises from eVoting?

bren2001

is_that_so wrote: »

It's an awful lot of money to spend on a problem , which is really just a lack of patience.

How much do we spend already? It's also a fairly inconsequential amount for the state. We live in the 21st century, if we can speed up the process and still maintain its security, I don't know why we wouldn't.

swampgas

markodaly wrote: »

You work in IT but never heard of blockchain?
What exactly do you do in IT? Work at a helpdesk?

Blockchain depends on an IT infrastructure. It depends on the software used to implement it. It makes the whole process opaque. Ordinary people from all backgrounds can observe the current process and verify that it is being done correctly. Some half-assed bug-ridden voting app with blockchain bolted on would be a massive step backwards. And what happens when a bug is found - do we repeat the election again? Nah, we'd just ignore it and carry on.

The current system uses a process that has been used, cheated (ballot stuffing for example), and fixed (multiple verification steps introduced) over many cycles over the years. In computing terminology, the problem space is well understood, and the algorithms have been debugged over many iterations.

Paper voting is mature, understood, reliable, and trusted. Everything e-voting would not be if introduced.

Fan of Netflix

Sounds like Clune is raking in transfers from Doyle and Labour candidate. Funny how Labour transfer so much to Fine Gael, says it all about them.

is_that_so

bren2001 wrote: »

How much do we spend already? It's also a fairly inconsequential amount for the state. We live in the 21st century, if we can speed up the process and still maintain its security, I don't know why we wouldn't.

About €20m per plebiscite. What is causing the (irrational IMO) ire here is the sheer quantity of candidates slowing it all down. In the GE/locals it's generally all over inside 2 days.

is_that_so

Fan of Netflix wrote: »

Sounds like Clune is raking in transfers from Doyle and Labour candidate. Funny how Labour transfer so much to Fine Gael, says it all about them.

It's pretty much been that way since the 1970s. They have a long-standing positive history, despite the occasional spats between them.