FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2279203151> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2279203151 abstract "Americans trust computers to run critical applications in fields such as banking, medicine, and aviation, but a growing technophobic movement believes that no computer can be trusted for electronic voting. Members of this movement claim that in order to have secure elections, Americans must revert to paper ballots. Such claims are not only incorrect but attack the very foundation of our digital society, which is based on the knowledge that information can be reasonably secured. Clearly, no system with a human element - including electronic and nonelectronic voting machines - is error-proof, and specific versions of certain voting machines have security weaknesses. Neither of these facts, however, should be taken as a universal indictment of e-voting. Direct recording electronic (DRE) voting machines are electronic machines, similar to ATMs, that let voters view ballots on a screen and make choices using an input device such as buttons or a touchscreen. Some opponents of electronic voting are lobbying for legislation that would require so-called voter-verified paper audit trails for all DRE voting machines. The purpose of the paper audit trails would be to provide proof that the DRE voting machines functioned correctly. Unfortunately, as discussed in this report, paper audit trails for DRE voting machines have several shortcomings. They do not provide complete security to voters and they increase costs and risks. Furthermore, requiring voter-verified paper audit trails would prevent the use of innovative voting technology that offers voters more security, transparency, and reliability than can be delivered with paper audit trails alone. Congress is now considering legislation that would mandate that all DRE voting machines have voter-verified paper audit trails, and many states will vote on similar legislation this year. We believe it is time for the debate on e-voting technology to move beyond a discussion of paper audit trails. To restore voter confidence and promote secure election technology in the United States by ensuring that states can continue to improve their voting systems, this report recommends the following: * Congress and the states should allow the use of fully electronic ballots, not restrict electronic voting systems to those that create paper ballots. * Congress and the states should require that future voting machines have verifiable audit trails, not require machines that create verifiable paper audit trails. * Congress should provide funding for the U.S. Election Assistance Commission to issue grants for developing secure cryptographic voting protocols and for pilot testing of new voting technology." @default.
• W2279203151 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2279203151 creator A5032842312 @default.
• W2279203151 date "2008-01-01" @default.
• W2279203151 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2279203151 title "Stop the Presses: How Paper Trails Fail to Secure E-Voting" @default.
• W2279203151 cites W1511767811 @default.
• W2279203151 cites W1529323116 @default.
• W2279203151 cites W1593573628 @default.
• W2279203151 cites W2004638898 @default.
• W2279203151 cites W2108079590 @default.
• W2279203151 cites W2137976860 @default.
• W2279203151 doi "https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1105058" @default.
• W2279203151 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W2279203151 type Work @default.
• W2279203151 sameAs 2279203151 @default.
• W2279203151 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2279203151 countsByYear W22792031512021 @default.
• W2279203151 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2279203151 hasAuthorship W2279203151A5032842312 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C102483414 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C108827166 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C121955636 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C167654663 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C199521495 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C2777094542 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C2780612046 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C38652104 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C520049643 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C102483414 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C108827166 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C121955636 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C144133560 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C167654663 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C17744445 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C199521495 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C199539241 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C2777094542 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C2780612046 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C38652104 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C41008148 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C520049643 @default.
• W2279203151 hasConceptScore W2279203151C94625758 @default.
• W2279203151 hasLocation W22792031511 @default.
• W2279203151 hasOpenAccess W2279203151 @default.
• W2279203151 hasPrimaryLocation W22792031511 @default.
• W2279203151 hasRelatedWork W120743831 @default.
• W2279203151 hasRelatedWork W2083180731 @default.
• W2279203151 hasRelatedWork W2324394808 @default.
• W2279203151 hasRelatedWork W2341505773 @default.
• W2279203151 hasRelatedWork W2510851679 @default.
• W2279203151 hasRelatedWork W3003965304 @default.
• W2279203151 hasRelatedWork W3112720073 @default.
• W2279203151 hasRelatedWork W40874562 @default.
• W2279203151 hasRelatedWork W4200155470 @default.
• W2279203151 hasRelatedWork W4200226302 @default.
• W2279203151 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2279203151 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2279203151 magId "2279203151" @default.
• W2279203151 workType "article" @default.