1. If you're too stupid to figure out how to get a photo ID, you shouldn't be allowed to vote anyway.
That's pretty much all the longer the list needs to be.
That's pretty much all the longer the list needs to be.
Reasons for voter ID laws.
- Thread starter Crazyhole
- Start date
You should get a voter ID upon registration and identity verification that can be used to vote universally. It should be free. Or even better we should be allowed to vote via computer or phone and authenticate with two factor authentication. The same identity security methods that we have decided are good enough for security of literally every thing else. The problem is there is so much influence a state can have on what they require that you have varying methods of identifying a voter between different states. For federal elections (president, US senate) there should be a federally standardized method of Identification and voting.
Isn't this basically what the Act did in the '60s? I'm not tracking this.
I utterly agree with this but, unfortunately, Big Tech would screw this up, between selfish interests and utter incompetence.
We, at the time (i.e., Red Hat et al.), unsuccessfully pushed similar, open source approaches with the Decennial, ACA/Tax and other efforts. Prime contractors don't like open source and community-based approaches. In fact, CSC, Harris, SAIC and others came to hate us, at the time (i.e., Red Hat), because we advocate such.
It's difficult to 'pull the government out of the non-issues' because they are anally risk adverse. They will spend $100M out of fear of something going wrong if they don't spend $100M. I've seen so many of Big Tech and major Integration firms win contracts solely out of that argument.
The only time we, at the time (i.e., Red Hat), found ourselves preventing the taxpayer getting screwed over, is when there are time constraints. E.g., after every prime spent 3 years screwing up the Decennial, they finally let us -- and there were only 3 of us Red Hat consultants (not 900 contractors) -- completely re-deploy the entire compute infrastructure for the 2010 Census.
Don't get me started, I spent a week going the non-sense, but by after we finally after we redeployed over a 3 day weekend using my set of Kickstarts, we were computing 10x faster. Our other application-specific consultants then did the rest. I cannot stress how horrendous some of these prime contractors are, with guaranteed hours and money, and they will throw more hardware at an issue. Only when time constraints prevent such will people care, very sad. That's why I said 'hell no' to the ACA Tech Surge.
We (LPI) also are now working with others (e.g., LF, LI, et al.) are also pushing for similar requirements and legislation to no avail. Even some (i.e., LF) have put forth some 'common sense ID integration' for all the endless vaccination systems, to get some actual certificate exchange and trust. But nope, that interferes with Big Tech primes as well.
At LPI, Maddog has been all over his, along with our other board members who are part of UN working groups and efforts. Big Tech has a real problem with it, and has massive lobbying. And just like with the E-voting machines in the wake of 2000, incompetence rules, and forces bad implementations -- e.g., even ones Diebold and IBM were against.
It's difficult to 'pull the government out of the non-issues' because they are anally risk adverse. They will spend $100M out of fear of something going wrong if they don't spend $100M. I've seen so many of Big Tech and major Integration firms win contracts solely out of that argument.
The only time we, at the time (i.e., Red Hat), found ourselves preventing the taxpayer getting screwed over, is when there are time constraints. E.g., after every prime spent 3 years screwing up the Decennial, they finally let us -- and there were only 3 of us Red Hat consultants (not 900 contractors) -- completely re-deploy the entire compute infrastructure for the 2010 Census.
Don't get me started, I spent a week going the non-sense, but by after we finally after we redeployed over a 3 day weekend using my set of Kickstarts, we were computing 10x faster. Our other application-specific consultants then did the rest. I cannot stress how horrendous some of these prime contractors are, with guaranteed hours and money, and they will throw more hardware at an issue. Only when time constraints prevent such will people care, very sad. That's why I said 'hell no' to the ACA Tech Surge.
We (LPI) also are now working with others (e.g., LF, LI, et al.) are also pushing for similar requirements and legislation to no avail. Even some (i.e., LF) have put forth some 'common sense ID integration' for all the endless vaccination systems, to get some actual certificate exchange and trust. But nope, that interferes with Big Tech primes as well.
At LPI, Maddog has been all over his, along with our other board members who are part of UN working groups and efforts. Big Tech has a real problem with it, and has massive lobbying. And just like with the E-voting machines in the wake of 2000, incompetence rules, and forces bad implementations -- e.g., even ones Diebold and IBM were against.
I could go on and on and on about this. Where there's a problem, a proprietary, sole prime contractor supported, solution is going to be pitched by lobbyists. And they rule. And then there's incompetence. Like using 'fat' Windows and Access for things, like they did with voting machines. Eventually they went back to legacy, embedded systems that 'just work' and have 'full paper trails.'
I have just been involved with too many of these stupid things. Heck, Windows-based ATMs were never supposed to have existed either.
Again, see vaccine IDs. Same problem, same Big Tech sales. Never gonna happen.
Or at least a 'minimum compliance' from a federal standpoint that makes select 'federal IDs' valid in all states. States can still do what they want outside of that.
In any case, the Texas case is pretty much 85% non-problem. I agree with 85% of what Newsweek says here, but they are leaving out 15% that are an issue.
New York Times Helps Democrats Pursue 'Restrictive' Voting Lie
We should want the most secure and fair elections as possible, but leftists seem disinterested.
www.newsweek.com
Last edited:
Yep. IT isnt the IDs themselves that are really the issue, it is the accessibility of them. Alabama years ago closed several DMVs in mostly black areas, which of course made it harder for those people to get IDs when in some cases they would be an hour or more from the nearest DMV. Texas used to (this may have changed, I dont know) accept a hunting and fishing license, but not a college ID from a state school, which is a government ID. And of course there is a reason for that, hunters and fisherman in Texas are likely to vote GOP, and college kids tend to vote Democrat.
But also to add. A lot of these new voter laws have nothing to do with IDs.
Voting by computer or phone is a stupid idea.
There would be absolutely no transparency in the process.
Before you start countering with “but online shopping and banking!” let me just remind you that at any time you can check your bank account online and review or dispute your transactions, and the same is true of shopping on Amazon, et al.
A voting system without any kind of audit trail is not secure and will not be trusted. Period.
I utterly disagree, if done (and I can provide more detail) to what @hemightbejeremy's initial comments suggest about two-factor. In-person registration can allow public officials to verify fingerprints of any certificate system. E.g.,
We do this for the US military CAC system.
It's long been based on AOL-Netscape iPlanet, later Red Hat, Certificate System (Upstream Dogtag, after Red Hat open sourced it in 2005, after acquiring the AOL-Netscape iPlanet assets in 2004). Most people don't see that portion because they are using a local authority/proxy, such as ActiveDirectory, the 'end system.'
SIDE NOTE: After Google 'closed up' it's Authenticator, Red Hat released Android/iOS versions of a free OTP app. Most people just have never heard or used it, but it's completely compatible. Microsoft's authenticator also does similar, but prefers (by default) it's own (non OTP compatible) solution, and is not open source either. Again, 'Big Tech' loves control! And major integrators like Lockheed-Martin, Leidos, et al. love to 'control things.'
Who do you think they hire as an architech/SME for these systems? As I said, I've been sub's endlessly to HP, IBM and then 'public sector' stuff via Carahsoft, DLT, et al. to countless 'household names.' That's why whenever I want a job with one of them, I have it.
SIDE NOTE: After Google 'closed up' it's Authenticator, Red Hat released Android/iOS versions of a free OTP app. Most people just have never heard or used it, but it's completely compatible. Microsoft's authenticator also does similar, but prefers (by default) it's own (non OTP compatible) solution, and is not open source either. Again, 'Big Tech' loves control! And major integrators like Lockheed-Martin, Leidos, et al. love to 'control things.'
Who do you think they hire as an architech/SME for these systems? As I said, I've been sub's endlessly to HP, IBM and then 'public sector' stuff via Carahsoft, DLT, et al. to countless 'household names.' That's why whenever I want a job with one of them, I have it.
Two factor and, better yet, ZeroTrust systems are none-to-difficult, and can be embedded into a Voter ID card. It even allows voters to get one-time keys, which could be used for the actual Voter ballot -- one time ballot IDs.
I.e., there's no way for a voter to be tied to the ballot, but the voter can be 'tracked' as if 'voted' or not.
The only problem is the overhead and training. A lot of voting relies on volunteers, and this would require at least some election officials be staffed with Voter ID card SME. But if they would use the Voter ID cards for an anonymous, but validated, submission system, it could go a long way -- including being unable to track submissions down to specific things, like one-time ballots IDs.
That's because those systems suck.
They have only one-side verification using certificates. Although a few sites/solutions out there require verification on both-sides, most people don't want to deal with them, and they are optional.
Again, most people don't want to deal with even basic 2-factor, but a Voter ID based key would solve a lot of things ... if it's designed right, and ballots are one-time and not traceable. This is none-too-difficult to do. Heck, I'm sure someone has a whitepaper out there.
If not, I should definitely write one. Heck, Kerberos came out of MIT Project Athena as a result of a similar problem
-- although too many people today think Microsoft invented Kerberos, or 'worked with' MIT on it. NOT!
Audit trails don't have to be tied to a voter. They just have a custody chain, digitally too.
Audit trails only need to be tied to the ballot and ... whether the voter voted or not. Again, custody chain. When an election official in a county uses stupid Windows/Access/Excel to do this, that's NOT one.
This is one case where tech would solve a lot! Unfortunately, Big Tech wants control, and ... with politicians involved ... they'll screw it up. I mean, this stuff is 25+ years old too, not even blockchain.
And you guys wonder why I finally left DC, and say 'no' everyone they call with every 'Tech Surge'? I'm so tired of the politicking on this stuff.
Last edited:
I did a bunch of research when HR 1 was introduced and the nationwide studies showed that there weren’t that many people without access to an ID office within an hour’s commute multiple times a month. The report, of course, showed a big number but that was because they filtered out offices that weren’t open at least 3 days a week. But in many rural areas, 3 days a week is a waste of money. So they open the rural offices a day or two a week to accommodate people rather than close them entirely. They also diversified tax collector and other state offices to provide IDs.
None of which matters, though, if you think that any ID law is about racist or vote suppression.
I'm be the first to admit the GOP is guilty of gerrymandering districts.
But so is the DNC when it comes to counting undocumented, non-citizen residents for purposes of representation -- which is akin to what southern states demanded with slaves.
It's funny how the DNC is now using a slavery argument, which is not much different than reality, since most are 'permanently indentured' and will never get a Green Card, much less citizenship, by design of the left.
We Libertarians have been pointing out the hypocrisy and special interest of the left on this matter. We're pro-immigration, pro-Green Card, anti-Work Visa. Work visas are for 90 days or less.
If people are working in this country, they should have a Green Card and be given a path to citizenship, away from people who take from their paycheck on 'both sides of the ocean.'
Last edited:
If you think there isn’t a computer forensics trail which puts the trail of physical ballots to shame then you are just ignorant of technology. Imagine a system where you could review and dispute your vote. Oh wait. It already exists. What do you find more secure about the audit trail of mail in ballots vs in person ballots vs on the computer? What makes you think that a computerized voting system would be on “without any kind of audit trail”? Again ignorance.
Who’s watching these completely digital polls?
If it can’t be monitored by someone with very little technical knowledge, it’s too complicated for public trust.
I get that computer geeks can see what’s going on, but when regular people have to trust processes they don’t understand explained to them by people they don’t know or trust… that’s not how to conduct an election.
I’m 35 years old and work in software training and business consulting. If you think people understand 2-factor authentication and trust software, you’re wildly out of touch with most people.
The same ones who use computing systems to tabulate votes. You train them on those systems.
Smart cards work fairly well. Any solution can be easily taught. In fact, they might save a lot of overhead.
The problem is that Big Tech and their Intergrators excels at selling BS, and making it stick, instead of using open standards that are not proprietary.
Actually most don't understand basic asymmetric aspects and systems. They are no better than general administrative in this regard -- in fact -- non-repudiation is what I spend the most time teaching even 'computer geeks.'
Correct, which is why we get Google, Microsoft, and some of their cronies like Accenture, HCS, et al., just like Diebold and IBM.
Because people trust names, instead of seeking open standards and open community developed verified solutions, even when the proprietary vendors take 90% of it and change it just a little bit.
So we never get good solutions that aren't locked to a single vendor and their ecosphere. That's always the problem.
And yet, military personnel understand CAC cards and administrative staff who are not computer geeks have no problem supporting them.
But CAC cards were designed based on an open standard, and are even backed by an open source solution. Unfortunately we haven't gotten any Big Tech to do that for even vaccine passports. They are all proprietary and costly.
Even as open standards and community organizations offer a way for vaccine authorities to interoperate, none of them are interested. That's because Big Tech and their Integrators would have to give up control.
That's why this whole lockdown has been a load of special interest BS ... right through the vaccine passports.
Google can do that, and some 3 letter agencies can take advantage of it.
But for voting, it would be a civil rights nightmare.
So you think a hack is impossible?
Countries go to war to install friendly regimes, but they wouldn’t dare hack an online election.*
People use two factor authentication every day. It is much more secure than other identification methods. Token/password or device/password are two of the more common. Though most smart phones have facial recognition which can be another added layer of authentication. All of this is light years ahead of signing a ballot and mailing it in. The fact that you can’t understand it doesn’t make it bad or non-auditable. And for clarification most don’t know or understand the current voting system in their state and how items are tallied. That doesn’t make those systems inherently bad.
If Russia can hack the election as it is, putting it up on the internet might make it a little bit easier for them to hack. But as a fan of the walking dead, I find it hard to be against anything that would make electing our next zombie n chief prez. So far this one is a hoot. makes it much easier to cut the chord.
Which is why verification in both directions, along with one-time keys as well as off-line and related management and credentials, works.
That's why the CAC system works as well too.
When Red Hat was compromised a dozen years ago, because an employee put their private key on a public server without a passphrase, none of Red Hat's software release was compromised, because the Red Hat signing key was in hardware.
We use hardware security modules (HSMs) in systems for a reason.
Most people use Internet commerce sites that are only one-way, and rely on a single password or an on-line password/token system, even if two-factor. And there are no HSM solutions in use, not even on the server-end only.
The key is to use smart cards and off-line solutions where keys cannot be extracted. That allows all sorts of things, along with one-time keys and other implements. This can be well designed.
But Big Tech isn't interested in that, and most Intergrators don't care either.
I think your attack vectors would be on the servers and datastores and not on man-in-the-middle attacks on individual votes. Which would be a huge improvement because right now everything is vulnerable.
Boo-yah! Exactly!
This is one area where the US gov't could lead. States don't have to use the 'VSC' (Voter Smart Card) approach developed, but it would be nice to have an open system. My only fear is that it would become a National ID card that replaces the Social Security Number (SSN), and be required for everything. And then that would make it far more interesting to compromise because now it's not just for trying to change votes, but for financial reasons.
Like everything, it shouldn't be the end-all, be-all. But it would be something to do every 20 years, like every generation or every 2nd Census. The US gov't comes up with a 'reference design.'
anyways, i don't think ID is necessary. i think a better idea would be to provide some proof of a gym membership or perform a physical aptitude test. people who are fat and weak have no business making decisions for the greatest country civilization has ever seen.
Like @UCFBS ? He has no business talking about COVID or vaccines. He should stick to rating Chinese buffets
I even had heard that his last fortune cookie said, “You no come back, fat boy.”
sounds good to me, would probably have to keep the crying about golfing to a minimum though. healthy, active people have to make time.
Latest posts
-
-
***Gus Malzahn Press Conference - West Virginia Week ⚔️🏈- Latest: ThesePeopleDontGiveaSh_t
-
