Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Friday December 04 2015, @09:54AM   Printer-friendly
from the watch-for-hanging-chads dept.

Sky News reports

It was one of the world's early adopters of high-tech electronic voting. [Now, however, Brazil will] revert to using paper [ballots] because it cannot afford to run the electoral computer systems.

The Superior Electoral Court has had its funding cut by the equivalent of £75M--in the middle of a tender for computer systems for next year's elections.

The process was due to be finalised this month but has been thwarted by the government cuts and voters will now cast their ballots using paper instead.

The court says the move will cause "irreversible and irreparable damage" and says the public interest is at threat.

A statement read: "The biggest impact of the budget cuts is around the purchasing of electronic voting equipment, as bidding and essential contracting is already under way and to be concluded by end of December."

El Reg notes

Brazil has had electronic voting in some form since 1996, when it first trialled systems in the state of Santa Catarina. The system was subject to criticism in 2014, when ZDNet Brazil reported on university tests that suggested the system wasn't sufficiently secure against fraud.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Friday December 04 2015, @02:24PM

    by Thexalon (636) on Friday December 04 2015, @02:24PM (#271790)

    Here's the problem with direct democracy: It means that decisions are being made either by those with the most spare time on their hands (who are probably not the people that have the best understanding of the issue in question) or those who don't take the time to really consider all aspects of the question.

    Also, almost all of those proposed direct democracy systems are predicated on easy access to some sort of computing device with Internet access. Both of those cost money, and not everybody has them. Particularly in Brazil, where there is a significant population several days' journey from anything resembling civilization.

    --
    The inverse of "I told you so" is "Nobody could have predicted"
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 04 2015, @08:30PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 04 2015, @08:30PM (#271935)

    The bank ties your identity to every point in the process.
    At the polling place, the paper you drop into the box isn't traceable back to you.

    With remote voting, how do you verify that a boss|patriarch|landlord|Mafia leg-breaker|etc. isn't manipulating the voter?
    (I'm not thrilled about the mail-in ballot notion either and for the same reason.)

    Convenience and security tend to be orthogonal.

    -- gewg_