Hacker News Reader

Has anybody even read the article? Jesus. Your comment is a complete non-sequiter.

There are two ENTIRELY UNRELATED questions. One question is "cryptographic verification." One is "Paper/electronic"

You can have any combination. You can have a crypographical, verifiable, PAPER voting system, for example (and that's what this article is about).

View on HN

Did you read the comment you're replying to? Its whole point is that lay people don't understand sophisticated cryptography like homomorphic encryption, which makes it difficult to trust, whereas they do understand and trust paper. A cryptographic paper voting system that required advanced math to understand would have the same legitimacy problem as a cryptographic electronic voting system.

> A cryptographic paper voting system that required advanced math to understand would have the same legitimacy problem as a cryptographic electronic voting system.

No, because it'll still be counted manually by humans. What the cryptographic layer allows you to do is verify that your vote was properly counted or allow a trusted third-party to verify that for you. It doesn't take anything away from the paper voting system but only adds to it. That said, you'd still have to trust the device that generates your tracker, but maybe they've found a way to deal with that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com