5 ms·

I get the crypto fatigue because I feel it as well, but it really does apply here. Trustless voting is one of the more interesting possible applications of bloc

I get the crypto fatigue because I feel it as well, but it really does apply here. Trustless voting is one of the more interesting possible applications of blockchain tech, and if properly implemented it could very well do away with voter fraud.

jsymolon 9y ago
> voter fraud. Red Herring. Not counting voter registration fraud, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/0-000002-percent-of-all-the-ballots-cast-in-the-2016-election-were-fraudulent/?utm_term=.b50b8cb8b06b" https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/0-... Washington Post only found 4 cases in the 2016 election.
- tenaciousDaniel 9y ago
  Ha, yeah I was going back and forth between adding "to the extent that it exists". Nonetheless, we can't predict whether fraud/hacking is something we'll need to really worry about in the future. If a good solution exists, we should strive for it I think.
- andrepd 9y ago
  In case you haven't noticed, there are some other countries in this planet beside the United States :P. Voter fraud is a major problem in many developing countries, and electronic voting (if properly implemented) could help tremendously in making elections a great deal more transparent.
  - jsymolon 9y ago
    That's the point. it can't be properly implemented.
    - andrepd 9y ago
      Why do you say that? Is there a proof of non satisfiability for a set of criteria? Or you just decided it can't be done?
Balgair 9y ago
Like I said, it isn't wrong, and I kinda agree. Democracy is awesome but slow, we know that. It's also old, and we may have better versions out there now, maybe a Git-Democracy thingy, where it's mostly automated and we have 'code comments' in the laws to help with the judges. I dunno. 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.
- tenaciousDaniel 9y ago
  No, it's not going to solve people being assholes. But a shared, write-only and unalterable database of voting transactions created by pseudonymous entities could be an extremely useful tool if we really want to safeguard against this kind of thing. 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.
  - Balgair 9y ago
    Look, I know, it's cool, and like, it has the potential to help. But trying to tech/math your way into a better democracy isn't very likely because people are assholes; you have to make incentives for the assholery to fight itself, it's not easy. Hofstader in Godel Escher Bach goes WAY into why that is from a math/physics/art/music point of view, you should read it (maybe you have already), it's like 6 bucks. https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0465026567/ref=tmm_pap_used_olp_sr?ie=UTF8&condition=used&qid=&sr= https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0465026567/ref=tmm_p... 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.
    - 9y ago
pedrocr 9y ago
Only by introducing hundreds of extra failure modes. If you implement this I can now destroy your democracy by: - 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.
pm24601 9y ago
Big barrier: Convince voters that the system is reliable in theory and perfectly implemented. Paper works fine.

jsymolon 9y ago

> voter fraud. Red Herring. Not counting voter registration fraud, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/0-000002-percent-of-all-the-ballots-cast-in-the-2016-election-were-fraudulent/?utm_term=.b50b8cb8b06b" https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/0-... Washington Post only found 4 cases in the 2016 election.

tenaciousDaniel 9y ago
Ha, yeah I was going back and forth between adding "to the extent that it exists". Nonetheless, we can't predict whether fraud/hacking is something we'll need to really worry about in the future. If a good solution exists, we should strive for it I think.
andrepd 9y ago
In case you haven't noticed, there are some other countries in this planet beside the United States :P. Voter fraud is a major problem in many developing countries, and electronic voting (if properly implemented) could help tremendously in making elections a great deal more transparent.
- jsymolon 9y ago
  That's the point. it can't be properly implemented.
  - andrepd 9y ago
    Why do you say that? Is there a proof of non satisfiability for a set of criteria? Or you just decided it can't be done?

Balgair 9y ago

Like I said, it isn't wrong, and I kinda agree. Democracy is awesome but slow, we know that. It's also old, and we may have better versions out there now, maybe a Git-Democracy thingy, where it's mostly automated and we have 'code comments' in the laws to help with the judges. I dunno. 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.

tenaciousDaniel 9y ago
No, it's not going to solve people being assholes. But a shared, write-only and unalterable database of voting transactions created by pseudonymous entities could be an extremely useful tool if we really want to safeguard against this kind of thing. 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.
- Balgair 9y ago
  Look, I know, it's cool, and like, it has the potential to help. But trying to tech/math your way into a better democracy isn't very likely because people are assholes; you have to make incentives for the assholery to fight itself, it's not easy. Hofstader in Godel Escher Bach goes WAY into why that is from a math/physics/art/music point of view, you should read it (maybe you have already), it's like 6 bucks. https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0465026567/ref=tmm_pap_used_olp_sr?ie=UTF8&condition=used&qid=&sr= https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0465026567/ref=tmm_p... 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.
  - 9y ago

pedrocr 9y ago

Only by introducing hundreds of extra failure modes. If you implement this I can now destroy your democracy by: - 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.

pm24601 9y ago

Big barrier: Convince voters that the system is reliable in theory and perfectly implemented. Paper works fine.