• 0 Posts
  • 12 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 4th, 2023

help-circle



  • True, a fully transparent system would require every voter to understand the machine and how the systems prevent tampering.

    At the same time, I don’t think even a majority of voters know how the voting process works in the U.S. and Canada today, simply trusting that such a process exists. I’d argue that many of the processes aren’t even fair, with gerrymandering and spoiler effects being common. Large numbers of people even believe that mail-in votes are simply a tool for fraud.

    So yes, ideally everyone would fully understand every step of every system of the voting process, but a working system is possible without that. If a more opaque system could increase verifiability and/or allow faster easier voting, it might be worth it. Of course currently existing voting machines do neither, and massively increase opacity at every level, so they’re quite terrible, but I don’t think they need to be perfect to be useful.



  • I’m a little disappointed that it was a medical term at all. It’s a very functional word, like in flame retardant, or an engine retarder.

    I think it would have been much more applicable to methods of thinking and epistemology, like thought stopping techniques and special pleading, as these also severly restrict one’s critical thought yet can be overcome socially. There’s no sense having a social label for a medical condition, so don’t use such a punchy easy to use word for it if it’s not a choice.