'It's easier to hack an election than eBay': confessions of a Belarusian hacker

Re:'It's easier to hack an election than eBay': confessions ... by ascorbic on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @01:06PM (#13988348)

I don't get why the US has to make it so complicated. The UK has a similar first past the post system. All votes are crosses on paper ballots, counted by hand overnight. Works fine.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:'It's easier to hack an election than eBay': confessions ... by cderwin on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @01:16PM (#13988456)

This is how we do it in New Hampshire. It works fine here too.

Perhaps the problem is scale? New Hampshire is one of the smaller states, and the UK is obviously quite a bit less populous than the US.

Or perhas it's just a need for instant gratification. There's a reason New Hampshire was one of the last states to be called this year.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:'It's easier to hack an election than eBay': confessions ... by paulddraper on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @01:31PM (#13988619)

(1) Resources ought to scale with size.

(2) I would imagine that you'd go with the database on election night, but in days following, verify the paper votes as convenient.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:'It's easier to hack an election than eBay': confessions ... by ascorbic on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @01:26PM (#13988564)

Shouldn't really make a difference. Just add more counters. Counting votes is perfectly parallelizable.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:'It's easier to hack an election than eBay': confessions ... by tonyedgecombe on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @01:32PM (#13988628)

I'm sure you used to count votes manually before computers existed.

[ Parent | on HN ]