Bradley Tusk, a New York City political consultant, is on a mission to revolutionize the voting process by introducing mobile voting technology. His Mobile Voting Foundation has developed a cryptography-based protocol called VoteSecure that aims to allow people to securely cast their votes on iPhones and Android devices.
Tusk's plan is to start small by implementing mobile voting in local elections, such as city council or school board meetings, before moving on to larger elections like mayoralties or national contests. He believes that increasing voter turnout will lead to better representation in government, as politicians would be more inclined to push for policies that benefit the middle ground rather than extremes.
However, not everyone is convinced of Tusk's plan. Cryptographers and security experts have expressed concerns about the safety and verifiability of mobile voting systems. They argue that while Tusk's protocol may address some technical issues, it doesn't take into account the deeper problems with online voting, such as the risk of hacking and social engineering.
Tusk dismisses these concerns, saying that his critics are "zero-tolerance" and haven't seen what he's built. He argues that the current voting systems aren't perfect and that introducing a new technology is necessary to address the growing distrust in elections.
One expert, Joe Kiniry, who worked with Tusk on developing VoteSecure, disagrees with his former colleague. Kiniry believes that releasing an open-source protocol like VoteSecure provides a valuable contribution to the community, even if it's not perfect yet.
Ultimately, the fate of mobile voting technology depends on whether it can overcome its current limitations and gain widespread acceptance from politicians, voters, and security experts alike. If successful, it could lead to a significant increase in voter turnout and more representative government. But if it fails, it may perpetuate existing problems with election integrity.
Tusk's plan is to start small by implementing mobile voting in local elections, such as city council or school board meetings, before moving on to larger elections like mayoralties or national contests. He believes that increasing voter turnout will lead to better representation in government, as politicians would be more inclined to push for policies that benefit the middle ground rather than extremes.
However, not everyone is convinced of Tusk's plan. Cryptographers and security experts have expressed concerns about the safety and verifiability of mobile voting systems. They argue that while Tusk's protocol may address some technical issues, it doesn't take into account the deeper problems with online voting, such as the risk of hacking and social engineering.
Tusk dismisses these concerns, saying that his critics are "zero-tolerance" and haven't seen what he's built. He argues that the current voting systems aren't perfect and that introducing a new technology is necessary to address the growing distrust in elections.
One expert, Joe Kiniry, who worked with Tusk on developing VoteSecure, disagrees with his former colleague. Kiniry believes that releasing an open-source protocol like VoteSecure provides a valuable contribution to the community, even if it's not perfect yet.
Ultimately, the fate of mobile voting technology depends on whether it can overcome its current limitations and gain widespread acceptance from politicians, voters, and security experts alike. If successful, it could lead to a significant increase in voter turnout and more representative government. But if it fails, it may perpetuate existing problems with election integrity.
. Don't get me wrong, increasing voter turnout is a great goal, but have we thought through the potential security risks? Like, what if those iPhones and Androids aren't as secure as Tusk thinks they are? Or what about when you're voting on your phone at home, versus at a polling station? I mean, it's just too easy to get hacked or scammed online 
. And don't even get me started on the verifiability of those votes - how do we know who actually cast the ballot and where they are in the country? 
It sounds like a lot of work to make sure everything is secure and transparent, but if it's not, then I'm all for sticking with traditional voting methods.
? But on the other hand, I totally get why some experts are hesitant about the security aspects of it all... hacking and social engineering can be major problems with online stuff. What's gotta happen before we start trusting these new systems? And isn't it also true that our current voting system has its own set of issues? 
. First, it's mobile voting, then it's blockchain this and AI that... can't we just stick with what works? I mean, don't get me wrong, I love the idea of making voting more accessible, but do we really want to rely on untested tech to secure our elections? 
And what about all the other potential vulnerabilities? Not to mention the whole "middle ground" thing, it sounds like just a fancy way of saying "don't rock the boat". 
. I'd rather see some concrete changes to our current systems before we start messing with something as fundamental as how we vote 
️] I'm all for tryin' new stuff, but can we pls focus on gettin' the basics right before we unleash a digital voting apocalypse? 
I mean, who's gonna fact-check these VoteSecure systems? 
Can't we just stick with paper ballots and call it a day? 
[
]
. i mean bradley tusk is tryin hard tho 
, but dont get me wrong im all for makin voter turnout better and all that 
. but cant we just stick w/ paper ballots or somethin? 
. dont wanna risk any of these votes gettin rigged or smthn 
. Can't we just stick with traditional methods for now and work out any issues that come up? The thought of VoteSecure being hacked is giving me anxiety 
. We need to make sure our voting systems are secure before we start playing around with new tech 
.
. I'm gonna stick with my paper ballot, thank you very much 
That'd be a total disaster 
. I'm all for trying new things and improving the voting process, but let's take our time and test this tech thoroughly before rolling it out nationwide 
. It's better to err on the side of caution than to risk messing up an entire election 
.
! Tusk's idea of mobile voting is so cool, but I'm totally down for some skepticism too 
.
Let's get the conversation going! 
Have you seen those cyber attacks on voting systems in other countries? 
It's like, we've got to be more careful than that! 
. I mean, have you seen those news stories about voter suppression? It's like, why do we need to worry about hackers when we've got real-life issues going on? 
. I mean, think about it, if it doesn't work out, we'll be back to the old ways in no time