• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    896 hours ago

    “The last thing I would do is trust a computer program,” says the owner of a car company developing self driving & rocket company building automation into rocket launches.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      124 hours ago

      not to mention brain chips. Remember, every accusation is a confession with the MAGA crowd. I bet we’d find a few gems in the code for tesla and twitter now

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      12 hours ago

      Well, actually that’s correct, which is why there are various approaches to make it possible to trust an output of a computer program, verify it against that of other such computer programs, and so on.

      But in my opinion the whole idea of voting sucks. It’s less democratic than sortition. With sortition minority positions are disadvantaged, but with most systems involving vote they are absolutely trumped (pun intended, though saying “harrised” would not be as far as I’d like).

      Republics which used sortition have historically existed for very long spans of time. In Antiquity, in Middle Ages, during Renaissance. It’s harder to cheat with. Which also means it’s harder to sow distrust in.

      And, well, humans are superstitious creatures and results of sortition are much more similar to how they see divine will.

      Sortition is also more honest, it doesn’t abuse the human instinct of allowing politicians more than their rightful mandate when elected by a majority vote. When the reason a person holds some position is because a of a lucky die, the society looks at them more critically and they themselves know they won’t enter that river for a second time.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      35 hours ago

      To be fair, I wouldn’t trust a computer program for voting either, but I would trust and ride in an autonomously landing rocket.

      Which is why I much prefer the scantron type fill in the bubble ballots, you get a full digital count with an easily cross referenced ballot.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        24
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        So you fully trust computers that can kill you and others without a thought, but you don’t trust a computer to do the insanely simpler task of “count paper?”

        Also, musk and all the other disingenuous shitheads are complaining about any digital counting, including your preferred scantron ballots. They want very slow, flaw ridden human counting only, so they can inject chaos and noise into the electorial system and force the “congress picks the president” process in our constitution that will always favor the GOP.

        Paper ballots are already used in 98% of all US elections, they are just counted digitally. These are not serious people with serious concerns.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          22 hours ago

          A computer that lands a rocket incorrectly is found out immediately.

          A computer that tallies votes incorrectly may never be found out.

          • zarp86
            link
            fedilink
            21 hour ago

            Of all the hot takes I’ve read on the internet today, this is one of them.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            21 hour ago

            You do know that the electronic vote counts are audited, right?

            There’s a process to validate that the machines are counting correctly.