Could we talk about voting online in another thread? I dislike being inside this one.
Printable View
Could we talk about voting online in another thread? I dislike being inside this one.
Well it's definitely a risk. But voting booths are gameable too. Anything hacked in 8 minutes had wide open endpoints to begin with.
Those are easily found and plugged. I'm unsure how realistic these replicas are.
There's really nothing to worry about.
I'm looking forward to the election of President Weedlord Hitlerboner.
where did we have it before? I agree, bad argument. "This expert child does something in a controlled setting for experts."Quote:
Originally Posted by cigsthecat
I floated it somewhere, and now ARBM is being passive aggressive like only a white college professor hopeful can.
I was fairly certain it was floated here. There are two active threads in Sound Off and I evidently lost a coin flip. I'd be happy to be more outwardly aggressive in a more topical thread.
I guess I'm more easily convinced that if the Bank of Americas can't keep their digital shit together, then there's little hope that the Florida's 3rd Congressional Districts can.
Hopefully any voting software won't be written in fucking fortran.
Is that not who’s in office?Quote:
Originally Posted by kedawa
I think now is a great opportunity to employ people like that kiddie hacker as white hats so we can develop voting software that would be more secure, but I'm sure our tax dollars are going to something so much more important and amazing, like F-12s or whatever.
What if we amended the constitution so that whoever secured 65% of the vote or 350 EC votes, became POTUS, and if that wasn’t 1 person, then it would be the top 2 (or however many needed to reach 350)?
Executive orders, vetos, would all require a simple majority or signatures between the POTUS(s).