4 ms·

"The state had argued that the names of lottery winners must be disclosed to ensure that prizes are distributed fairly and that winners are not related to lotte

"The state had argued that the names of lottery winners must be disclosed to ensure that prizes are distributed fairly and that winners are not related to lottery employees." First, they know who they are writing the check to so the whole "not related to lottery employees" part seems rather bogus. I thought the whole point of disclosure was publicity, but this got plenty and being able to gamble without telling the world you won probably will sell more tickets anyway which is the whole point of the publicity.

hirsin 9y ago
The point of disclosure isn't to get a first order effect of preventing corruption (I don't know of any sensical mechanism that means publishing a name ensures it's not on a certain list). Obviously the government (should) knows if a winner is related to a government employee, but the only way to enforce that is to allow the public to verify that (or so the argument goes).
- bennyg 9y ago
  This seems like a decent application of the Blockchain.
  - tylersmith 9y ago
    There is no "the Blockchain". Which properties of a blockchain do you think would help with this situation?
    - andrestan 9y ago
      The magical part where it solves all of our problems with magic.
    - currymj 9y ago
      no, finally, for once, this is actually a real application of the blockchain! specifically any that has support for zero-knowledge proofs so that transactions are actually anonymous. you could have a bunch of people buy lottery tickets by sending currency to a smart contract, and then have it transfer the money to a random winner's address, and make the winner's address available only to the holder of the lottery contract's private key.
      - lostlogin 9y ago
        To an outsider this wouldn’t look that different to money laundering or some sort of large drug deal or arms trade.
      - icebraining 9y ago
        How would you verify that the holder of the lottery contract would actually send the prize to that address?
mobilefriendly 9y ago
They write the check to the trust, actually.

hirsin 9y ago

The point of disclosure isn't to get a first order effect of preventing corruption (I don't know of any sensical mechanism that means publishing a name ensures it's not on a certain list). Obviously the government (should) knows if a winner is related to a government employee, but the only way to enforce that is to allow the public to verify that (or so the argument goes).

bennyg 9y ago
This seems like a decent application of the Blockchain.
- tylersmith 9y ago
  There is no "the Blockchain". Which properties of a blockchain do you think would help with this situation?
  - andrestan 9y ago
    The magical part where it solves all of our problems with magic.
  - currymj 9y ago
    no, finally, for once, this is actually a real application of the blockchain! specifically any that has support for zero-knowledge proofs so that transactions are actually anonymous. you could have a bunch of people buy lottery tickets by sending currency to a smart contract, and then have it transfer the money to a random winner's address, and make the winner's address available only to the holder of the lottery contract's private key.
    - lostlogin 9y ago
      To an outsider this wouldn’t look that different to money laundering or some sort of large drug deal or arms trade.
    - icebraining 9y ago
      How would you verify that the holder of the lottery contract would actually send the prize to that address?

mobilefriendly 9y ago

They write the check to the trust, actually.