Avi Rubin Quotes

My position hasn't changed over the years. Which is that online voting is a very unsafe idea and a very bad idea and something I think no technological breakthrough I can foresee can ever change.

It's the concept of having a computer voting machine that bothers me, more so than the specific poor implementation that we have from Diebold.

Touch screen voting is a fine thing so long as they have a voter-verified paper trail.

Casino slot machines in Las Vegas are far better audited than are electronic voting machines.

We must not repeat the Florida fiasco. The way we vote and count our votes should be consistent with modern technology.

Why do we not have online voting? There's a security system in place already - on our cellphones. We already use biometrics to log into our banking. We use it to log into our health records. Why can't we have online safe and secure voting?

I'd like people to be educated on the voting machines, making sure that our democracy isn't being hijacked by computer technology. There's no reason there can't be a paper trail on those machines.

Eventually I foresee voting on the Internet, which will lead to much more direct democracy.

They reality is that we have 70% of our voters use a punch card system that I tried to change and that bipartisan resistance in the legislature stopped.

Widespread use of online voting will create the potential for abuse that will make the problems inherent in e-voting pale in comparison.

The basic idea behind a paper trail is that you take one of these electronic systems and you augment it with a printer that prints out people's vote as they vote.

Many of the touted advantages of electronic voting can still be achieved with paper ballots if you use a computerized ballot marking scheme.

Can you imagine on-line voting. Even when your body has to show up, they manage to cheat somehow.

About one quarter of all the voting machines in the United States stupidly do not have any paper trail.

Why do we still use paper to vote? Paper is over!

Mail-in voting is a proven and significant threat to election integrity.

The main advantage of blockchain technology is supposed to be that it's more secure, but new technologies are generally hard for people to trust, and this paradox can't really be avoided.

Touch-screen voting machines absolutely cannot be relied upon. Our recommendation was optiscan ballots - where you actually have custody of the actual ballots after the ballots have been passed through the computer. That's the most reliable system to use. And people should not use the electronic voting machines. Even electronic voting machines with paper trails can be manipulated.

Voting really doesn't mean anything. I wish I could say something different, but I think it's kind of a sham.

All voting is a sort of gaming, like checkers or backgammon, with a slight moral tinge to it, a playing with right and wrong, with moral questions; and betting naturally accompanies it. The character of the voters is not staked. I cast my vote, perchance, as I think right; but I am not vitally concerned that right should prevail. I am willing to leave it to the majority.

There are drones flying over the air randomly that are recording everything that's happening on what we consider our private property. That type of technology has to stimulate us to think about what is it that we cherish in privacy, and how far we want to protect it and from whom.

Election officials say that in 2016, it may be possible to vote for the president on your smartphone. Can you imagine that? With one swipe you can choose a president and at the same time tell him or her where you want to hook up.

However advanced the technology may become, life is impossible without humanity, and that's why we need a combination of science of thinking and art of living!

I'd actually love to think that I could trust Kerry on national security. But the only way I could do that, at this point, would be via self-delusion.

I think technology is such that we can reach new heights but we need some of the basics of the pre-technological age. It's counter-productive to be able to type a hundred words a minute but not know what the words mean.