Nothing alike. Voting is a trust issue, and while we have several trust based systems, it’s very hard to implement a system where even if the users don’t trust the system itself they can trust the result it produces. That’s the issue with electronic voting, trust that is placed in manual vote counting volunteers supervised by representatives of every party is small, because you only need to trust that each box was counted correctly. When you aggregate all those small trusts into a singular system, which even if divided in machines, is still a singular entity, then it’s impossible to trust the centralised system enough, and it must be incredibly robust to prove to every individual that their vote was cast correctly.
I proposed a system like that in my last comment, but I still wouldn’t trust such a system simply because the risk someone phishing the machines on voting day is so high, even if it has close to zero probability, that we can’t risk it.
Different kind of complex 😅 to be honest is more complicated than complex. Believe it or not it is done the old fashion way, we use string and lacker to seal the envelops like in medieval times, and the protocols dictate that all present must sign and write their recount of events. It’s a lot of fun and paper
If you think vote counting is conplex, just wait until you hear about embedded microcontrollers
Nothing alike. Voting is a trust issue, and while we have several trust based systems, it’s very hard to implement a system where even if the users don’t trust the system itself they can trust the result it produces. That’s the issue with electronic voting, trust that is placed in manual vote counting volunteers supervised by representatives of every party is small, because you only need to trust that each box was counted correctly. When you aggregate all those small trusts into a singular system, which even if divided in machines, is still a singular entity, then it’s impossible to trust the centralised system enough, and it must be incredibly robust to prove to every individual that their vote was cast correctly.
I proposed a system like that in my last comment, but I still wouldn’t trust such a system simply because the risk someone phishing the machines on voting day is so high, even if it has close to zero probability, that we can’t risk it.
Different kind of complex 😅 to be honest is more complicated than complex. Believe it or not it is done the old fashion way, we use string and lacker to seal the envelops like in medieval times, and the protocols dictate that all present must sign and write their recount of events. It’s a lot of fun and paper