• spaceghoti
    +4

    You might want to address the arguments I actually made. I didn't argue that speed is important, I argued that accuracy is. Computer tallying is far more accurate than human tallying. Yes, people have been doing it for thousands of years but that doesn't mean we haven't looked for tools to improve our accuracy at recording and counting.

    And yes, computers and the Internet are ubiquitous. They're everywhere. I acknowledged that there isn't 100% penetration but a lot of the people who don't currently vote have computers with Internet access, and a secure means of voting would increase participation which is no small concern. Democracy works best when people get involved, and the US has some of the lowest participation rates in the democratic world.

    Yes, there are pitfalls involved with the technology, but they're neither unique to computers nor insurmountable. Elections have been rigged since humans first thought to put things to a vote. It's a matter of understanding the risks and doing what we can to mitigate them. Change is going to happen whether you like it or not, so we may as well do our best to recognize what risks are involved and start dealing with it sooner rather than later.