National

How can we vote on Internet that is unsafe for banks, Canada, and alarms the President?

Recent articles highlight the folly and blind faith in technology leading many to trust voting on the Internet.

As Roosevelt said “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” seems to apply here.

There are real cyber risks, we need to protect or digital assets. Yet it does not help to jump to the conclusion that every breech is the work of our biggest enemy of the moment.

Like building new civic centers, baseball stadiums, and bankrolling fishing and hunting retailers there is plenty of real world evidence that Internet voting does not work well, yet we persist despite the evidence. Apparently the technology that actually works to protect Democracy, a technology actually under assault in Connecticut, is Freedom of Information.

“It happens all the time.” All over the place (Part 6)

Here we continue our review of some of our posts of past errors surfaced in Connecticut and around the country, selected from our over 900 posts. Last time we covered CTVotersCount posts from the 1st half of 2011.

Warning #1: Your absentee or mail-in vote might not count

Voters considering the Constitutional Amendment on the ballot this November and legislators considering what to do if it passes, need to pay heed to the facts and experience of early voting in other state. Common sense is not always a reliable guide.

Did you know that when you vote absentee or mail-in, you might be disenfranchised at a much higher rate than if you voted at the polls?

Faith in Internet voting? Prepare for “ShellShock”!

Continuing with facts to put in front of those with blind faith in the Interned, a disease that attacks those with little knowledge of computers, data communications, and software.

Shellshock can be used to take over the entire machine. And Heartbleed went unnoticed for two years and affected an estimated 500,000 machines, but Shellshock was not discovered for 22 years.

Two Reminders: Transparency and the Limits of All Paper Elections

This week we have had two demonstrations of themes we have discussed in theory at CTVotersCount.
From Connecticut, the importance of transparency.
From abroad the limits of paper only elections.

What is FVAP hiding? Whom if anyone are they assisting?

Electronic Privacy Information Center sues the Department of Defense to release Federal Voting Assistance Program test of Internet voting. <read>

We find it hard to believe the tests went well. What could possibly be the reason to withhold tests that could be used by states to learn about the risks and possibly any safe ways discovered to perform Internet voting?

Who would benefit by withholding such data? Internet voting vendors? Proponents of Internet voting? Those who would like to compromise elections or intimidate voters?

Revisited: What could a Secretary of the State Do?

Four years ago, we posted a list of actions that a Secretary of the State could do on his or her own to improve the election process. Lets revisit that list as the 2014 campaign begins in earnest.

“It happens all the time.” All over the place (Part 5)

We continue our review of some of our posts of past errors surfaced in Connecticut and around the country, selected from our over 900 posts.

NY: don’t follow CA in making “Top Two” error

NY considers “Jungle Primary” we call it another “Centrist Dream”

Political Insanity
– doing the same thing that has failed elsewhere, over and over.

Crumbling infrastructure – its not just highways and bridges anymore

The big news in Connecticut these days is Congress’s patched-up highway bill to continue patching-up our highways, while Connecticut has the the worst highway conditions in the nation.

But we are also just as dependent on electricity and the Internet. A Washington Post editorial highlights the risks, while Ed Snowden through Glenn Greenwald confirms the reality.

Page 10 of 58« First...89101112...203040...Last »