
Barbara Simons: The Computer Scientist Who Prefers Paper Voting - jrepinc
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/12/guardian-of-the-vote/544155/?single_page=true
======
oggyhead
One, I think the article doesn't underline why a paper based system would be
better than a paperless method other than giving examples of hacked paperless
system and weird claims like paper methods are bullet proof provided they are
marked clearly and properly(what? That is one of the reasons for starting off
paperless methods in the first place) A method that relies a lot on human
based management and logistics is bound to fail in more ways than methods that
use less of the same. Paper based methods involves a lot of human pieces than
a paperless method (electronic methods and the likes). I may be wrong, but our
shift towards automation clearly highlights the former. Any thoughts anybody?

~~~
BoiledCabbage
Human based systems can fail in more ways, but are more resilient. There is
less likely to be a systemic failure in a human based system.

Similarly, assuming a nefarious actor it is much more challenging to hack a
vote using a distributed human system than a digital one.

~~~
oggyhead
Resilient in what sense?able to come back and pretend like nothing happened or
gloss over and hope things will be alright? Isn't that why we are trying to do
away with people?

About the second thing you've surely that cannot be true in all cases. A vote
guarded by a mathematically difficult number theory problem can be hard to
crack than a ballot box guarded by a grumpy human who feels he/she has better
things to do. I believe one must not forget the cost of assembling such
problems and maintaining such problems

Curious to know your take and redefinition do

