Hacker News Reader

Comment by craftyguy | Hacker News Reader

Since all politicians operate reactively and not proactively with these sorts of things, it will take someone actually compromising an election and changing the outcome by manipulating vulnerable electronic voting machines before any action is taken. Even then, we'll probably just end up with a new model of electronic voting machine that fixes the one vulnerability used. So, good luck indeed.

View on HN

Actually, it will take someone actually compromising an election in a way that is unassailably and unquestionably broken. At that point the elected officials (who presumably have succeeded under the existing broken voting system) will rise up to fix the problem based on scientific evidence and their understanding of statistics.

Thankfully we can be sure that our votes have not been compromised in the past and there are no actors in the system who might benefit from avoiding looking into possible compromises.

Oh wait..

> At that point the elected officials (who presumably have succeeded under the existing broken voting system) will rise up to fix the problem based on scientific evidence and their understanding of statistics.

What motivation do they have to fix a system that put them in office in the first place? (hint: none, there is no motivation)

I thought references to scientific evidence and "understanding of statistics" made it sufficiently clear that I was joking.

Yea I know you were joking, but I was highlighting a major problem with the current system we have: the only people who can fix it tend to benefit most from having it broken in their favor.

The punchline should be "the Supreme Court," but I'm guessing it's "Russia."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com