- Bribing voters because you've implemented voting over the network
- Once you figure out you need to switch to voting booths I'll do timing attacks to deanonymize the vote
- As soon as you have a count I'll seed distrust in the count as only a very small percentage of the population actually understands the blockchain and cause a riot or two
Electronic voting is the reverse FizzBuzz. FizzBuzz tests if you know the absolute basics about technology to implement something extremely simple. Electronic voting tests if you are able to reject the use of technology when it doesn't add any advantage and instead creates very hard to solve failure modes. Voting benefits from the use of the extremely simple ballot and box. It benefits from it not being programmable and from the counting method being something that almost all the population is able to carry out let alone understand.
Red Herring. Not counting voter registration fraud, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/0-... Washington Post only found 4 cases in the 2016 election.
That said, bit-coins and their ilk are obvious tulip bubbles now, their hope is gone under the greed. Yes, the ideas are interesting and may have applications that are unseen. But as communism was great in theory and genocides in practice (mostly), I think the relentless blockchain spam is missing the point as well: Theory ain't shit because humans are assholes. And no, the blockchain is not going to solve that too.
Because of the rhetoric surrounding blockchain spam, it's easy to make the comparison to marxist theory. But I think it's really just a technology, not some grand scheme to alter our economic system. It's more realistic to simply say that it's a tool that could provide some very useful real world applications.
I'm not confounding bitcoins with marxism and that mess of history. I'm just saying that there are things out there that were good in theory, but the applications of the theory are just plain terrible, marxism is a famous example of that.
That's ridiculous. So we can't do anything, whatsoever, to improve our society and our systems, because eh people are assholes or whatever? That's nonsense. Of course we can improve our systems, our laws, our government, and of course mathematics and technology can help. For example, our voting systems are woeful because they are holdovers from a time when nobody thought about these things from a mathematical point of view (and nobody still does: "let's just vote for people and let the person with the most votes win" sounds perfectly simple and correct for 99% of the population). But we can do much better, and it can objectively improve our democracy a whole lot.
Will applying mathematics and technology to democracy fundamentally change and transcend human nature? Duh, of course not, but nobody claimed it will. There's plenty between implementing an utopia and going nothing at all.
Yes, that is correct. Also, me and Mr. Strawman could use some more hay, do you have any?
> ...and nobody still does...
This is what I'm talking about. Trying to force math/tech onto a democracy/republic where the voting population doesn't understand it cannot end well. The voter will be suspicious, and rightfully so, of the process if they do not understand it. This is especially true if there is any corruption in the system at all. Since we know men are not angels, then the vast majority of voters must have belief in the processes as we all know men do become devils. Democracy demands this faith to work. Yes, we can make the system mathematically better, but if that comes at the cost of the faith in democracy, then it's mute. Even with the system we have now, simple as it is, there is already a large lack of faith in it by a lot of the US, and this is already a threat to idea of self-determination.
Paper works fine.