Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

In idaho we have a paper ballot and scantrons (effectively).

Simple, cheap, fast, and easy to audit.

I don't really see why this isn't the standard beyond very dense populations needing bigger election offices or ideally extended early voting.





Scantrons are subject to voter error, confusion, mis-labeling. They're almost as bad as punch-ballot.

The state of Georgia finally has the perfect voting machine setup after many years of "hackable" digital-only voting machines:

- Voters are given a signed, electronic card to make choices at a voting booth (same as before, in the suspicious "hackable" era).

- As of 2020, after you make your elections, you receive a full-page paper printout which records your choices on A4-sized paper. This is your ballot. The names of your choices are clearly visible so you can physically review all of your votes in a large, easy to read font. All of it is crisply printed with no "hanging chads", misprinting, or under-inked results. There's only one page.

- The paper ballots also have a large QR code that can easily be machine-read, but the human-readable portions are permanently linked with the QR code for later auditing.

- You scan and deposit your paper ballot and card together in a secure lock box that cannot be opened without key.

This system feels perfect.


> Scantrons are subject to voter error, confusion, mis-labeling.

There's no way to design a voting system that won't confuse some percentage of the population.

But when I said "scantron" it's not an actual scantron. The ballots look like this [1]

I don't really see how you could make that easier to fill out.

EDIT: Gah, they make it hard to create these links.

Click on district "1921" to see a sample ballot.

[1] https://gisprod.adacounty.id.gov/apps/electionday/#/


>- The paper ballots also have a large QR code that can easily be machine-read, but the human-readable portions are permanently linked with the QR code for later auditing.

How do you ensure secret ballots when it's printing an opaque identifier (the QR code) on your ballot?


Statistical auditing.

After the elections you sample the ballots to make sure they match. If you find any instances of error, that immediately raises red flags about the entire vote set.

In a close election, you comb over the results.


That's not my question. What's preventing the machine from encoding my name in the QR code? That breaks the concept of a secret ballot.

Trust.

If such a scheme was ever discovered, it would make national news.


I don’t think the QE is really needed. A reasonably formatted ballot that is almost always machine marked should be trivial to OCR.

Combined with risk limiting audits you have a very strong system


Isn't "just trust me bro" approach to elections the whole reason for the OP and the wider election fraud controversy?



Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: