/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.14505899]

How come science is incapable of figuring out a way to make an honest, trustworthy electoral system? Seems like the simplest thing in the world to just count votes accurately and report the results of the count honestly, but the government science and tech experts have somehow or other been utterly flabbergasted by this vexing problem since the 20th century. Do any of the scientists here have a solution to this problem? Do any have an explanation for why the rest of the scientists have failed to produce a workable solution for so long?

[Anonymous No.14505903]

>>14505899
How come /pol/ can't stay in /pol/?
Of all the stupid things they make /pol/ threads on boards that have nothing to do with politics.

[Anonymous No.14505921]

>>14505899
>implying that science is otherwise honest and trustworthy

[Anonymous No.14505926]

>>14505899
>How come science is incapable of figuring out a way to make an honest, trustworthy electoral system?
we did, just get people to put papers into a transparent plastic box, and allow anybody to come and check how people put papers in the box, and how papers are counted afterwards

[Anonymous No.14505931]

>put a button with a cap on it in booth
>cap only gets released once someone enters the booth by someone observing
>button can only be pressed once before being reset and the cap replaced
>votes are counted digitally with no way of tamppering
Solved

[Anonymous No.14505936]

>>14505931
>>votes are counted digitally with no way of tamppering

[Anonymous No.14505950]

>>14505899
It is already scientifically proven that democracy is a scam:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow's_impossibility_theorem

[Anonymous No.14505951]

>>14505899
the blockchain will fix this

[Anonymous No.14505957]

>>14505936
Yes, no one has access to the computer and it is not connected to the Internet. All it does is display the number of votes.

You don't even need a computer, just a digital counter.

[Anonymous No.14505959]

>>14505957

[Anonymous No.14505963]

>>14505957
Paper ballots and counting with complete transparency is still the best way. Or you know fucking gas people invovled with election rigging.

[Anonymous No.14505971]

>>14505963
What 8 said rules out any kind of tampering

[Anonymous No.14505978]

>>14505931
>>votes are counted digitally with no way of tamppering

>digital
>can't be tampered

Is everyone retarded now?

[Anonymous No.14506017]

>>14505963
>Or you know fucking gas people invovled with election rigging
Then you get false accusations so people can get their enemies gassed. Just like SWATting..

[Anonymous No.14506024]

>>14505899
Verifiable and anonymous are two opposing forces. We want our votes to be anonymous so no one has to worry about the paramilitary wing of a political party coming after them. Vote buying, threats of loss of employment, loss of housing, etc. are also reasons why voting has to be anonymous.
Since we cannot get rid of anonymity, transparency in the ballot collecting and counting process is the next best thing. As was seen in the 2016 election in the United States, where great lengths were employed to hide the chain of custody of ballots and the counting of ballots, the process is far from transparent. Given the scale of elections, it might not even be possible for the entire process to be transparent enough to prevent cheating, though the scale of it could be reduced significantly.

[Anonymous No.14506133]

homomorphic cryptography
publick key cryptography tally stick meta
merkle trees of votes

It'd be nice to go online with my private key and see a cryptographic proof that my vote was counted as is, and that everyone is confident that that public key was mine but no one knows what vote was hashed except by pki

[Anonymous No.14506178]

>>14505899
science sponsored by government IS corruption

[Anonymous No.14506182]

OP seems to assume the system wants accurate vote counts. Members of the technocratic aristocracy want results which match the correct direction of history, defined by them.

[Anonymous No.14506185]

>>14505903
This. I'm here for neutron stars, ai, and gene editing. I don't care you people are cucked by media/politics.

[Anonymous No.14506188]

>>14506185
Which if any of those things you get depends upon politics, which is just resource competition and allocation within the various primate packs.

[Anonymous No.14506266]

>>14506185

[Anonymous No.14506273]

>>14506185
Hypocrite

[Anonymous No.14506330]

>>14506185
The tools are available but if you refuse to use them, that's no one's fault other than your own.

[Anonymous No.14506337]

>>14506133
>Anon, log in and show you voted the way I told you or you're kicked out of my house!
Fail.

[Anonymous No.14506341]

>>14506185
>i just want to stay in my safe space and read muh ai popsci

[Anonymous No.14506617]

>>14506337
Everyone get a list of indiscernible fake keys that will display different combinations of voting choices.

[Anonymous No.14506638]

>>14505931
Voting machines are shit

[Anonymous No.14506660]

>>14505899
numbers aren't real, numbers are subjective, that is why. the people who say that numbers aren't subjective are lying, they are lying because they plan to to use the "numbers aren't subjective" fallacy against you in the future.
numbers are subjective, they are not calculable or orderly, you will never see anyone in your entire life agree with numbers when the numbers express bad news.
numbers are always subordinate to unquantified emotional desires. 2 + 2 = 4 only when i want it to.
>the numbers say i owe taxes? that can't be right, imma recalculate
>the numbers say i'm owed a refund, that seems more accurate

[Anonymous No.14506666]

>>14506188
Well, /pol/ lately has demonstrated itself to be very anti those things compared to the people they claim are cucking them.

[Anonymous No.14506761]

>>14506341
>Voting machines r science
Pathetic cuckold shill

[Anonymous No.14506783]

>>14505899
Oh, it figured that shit out since a long time ago. And multiple ways of doing it.
The thing is, politicians don't want fair elections. They want election systems that favor themselves. And their benefactors definitely don't want fair elections.
So improvement will be slow, if it happens at all.

[Anonymous No.14506786]

>>14506185
no one cares why you are here. I am here to dunk on nerds like you for being prissy little faggots then lol'ers while you and faggots like this >>14505903 whine about it

[Anonymous No.14506972]

>>14506786
You're not dunking on anyone. Your dad raised a sheep. Your echo chamber tried to branch out of pol and everyone is calling you retarded. Make another 'climate change isn't real' thread. You've been cucked by the media and now you're shilling for free. Kys npc.

[Anonymous No.14506998]

>>14505899
>How come science is incapable of figuring out a way to make an honest, trustworthy electoral system?
Because the people who are trying to get elected don't want a trustworthy electoral system, and they (or the people they answer to) are the ones who decide what the system is?

[Anonymous No.14507011]

>>14505899
>Do any of the scientists here have a solution to this problem?
Citizen-formed tribunals that are not part of the corrupt system.
Lampposts.
Helicopters.
Gallows.
Firing squads.

[Anonymous No.14507057]

>>14506972
YOU GOT DUNKED ON NERD

[Anonymous No.14507520]