10 ms·

Sierra Leone government denies the role of blockchain in its recent election

161 points by portofcall 9y ago

dwighttk 9y ago
The original story wasn't very clear how blockchain was involved. It seems very likely now with the NEC denying the claims that it was a bunch of hype. >“Agora’s results for the two districts they tallied differed considerably from the official results, according to an analysis of the two sets of statistics carried out by RFI,” >Was Agora simply attempting a PR stunt in support of its upcoming token sale. almost certainly
- dwighttk 9y ago
  for what it is worth, the indigenous Sierra Leone News site I follow has 0 references to "blockchain" and only one to "agora" (which doesn't seem to actually contain "agora") http://www.thesierraleonetelegraph.com/?s=blockchain http://www.thesierraleonetelegraph.com/?s=blockchain http://www.thesierraleonetelegraph.com/?s=agora http://www.thesierraleonetelegraph.com/?s=agora
  - IncRnd 9y ago
    Not the OP. That's good information you posted. Thank you!
  - rory096 9y ago
    >(which doesn't seem to actually contain "agora") I do believe that's a hit on "So Pythagoras was wrong?"
    - dwighttk 9y ago
      dangit Safari... you should show that when I cmd-f "agora"
- GenericsMotors 9y ago
  > The original story wasn't very clear how blockchain was involved. Didn't stop the ridiculously titled "Sierra Leone just ran the first blockchain-based election"[1] from being shared and strongly upvoted here on HN. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16622245 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16622245
  - dwighttk 9y ago
    I voted it up. I read the article because I'm interested in Sierra Leone and was interested in keeping an eye on developments (like how exactly blockchain was involved)... I should probably raise my standards for upvoting.
  - danso 9y ago
    You're linking to this thread; I think you mean to link to this one, which has 500+ upvotes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16598210 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16598210
    - GenericsMotors 9y ago
      Thanks, my mistake (and apparently too late to edit my original comment).
  - rdiddly 9y ago
    Well I guess I need to update my opinion on that story from "Cool application of blockchains!" to "Would've been a cool application of blockchains!"
- xorcist 9y ago
  Why check your sources when you can publish both the outrageous article and then a retraction as well? Instant click doubling!
mozumder 9y ago
Good, because blockchain for elections is a TERRIBLE idea. A large state can hack election results just by having millions of computers perform blockchain proof-of-work on false election data.
- popol12 9y ago
  That's not true at all. The worst the state can do is to deny votes to be written in the blockchain by mining empty blocks. But no matter how much computing power it has, the state can't write false votes, thanks to public key cryptography. If transactions where cheaper, voting on a public blockchain like Bitcoin would be a great thing. That's not the case today, but I'm pretty sure it will be in the coming years.
  - KenanSulayman 9y ago
    That’s not correct. The worst that can happen is falsifying votes before they’re written to the blockchain. And there’s nobody who will check the „blockchain“ for his vote, because people want to vote and get over with it.
  - IncRnd 9y ago
    There are many ways to subvert blockchains, especially being the authority in charge of data entry, without breaking crypto.
- rebuilder 9y ago
  This sounds like an argument against rolling your own blockchain instead of using an existing, highly secure one. Not that I'm convinced blockchains are the proper tool for the job. BTW, is it too late to stop using the word "blockchain" like it's something that can be bottled up and sold? I believe an article is required.
- malikNF 9y ago
  These guys, https://www.democracy.earth/ https://www.democracy.earth/ changed my view on using the blockchain for voting. I think its a really cool project, may be they might help you change your mind too.
Analemma_ 9y ago
This is actually good for Bitcoin. (Edit: guess I should've stuck the /s at the end of this)
Sangermaine 9y ago
Hard to believe unverified hype or outright deception is involved in something relating to blockchain technology.
- inetknght 9y ago
  Missing /s
  - IncRnd 9y ago
    Actually, that appeared to be a pithy comment not requiring a sarcasm tag.
  - roflchoppa 9y ago
    nah its not missing the /s tag, ive seen similar advertisements on Daly City Bart above the ATM machines.
- mattigames 9y ago
  I live in a third world country (Colombia) and the scammy hype is even here, people at cafes telling each other to "invest" in BTC and the other crypto currencies, usually through a middlemen (the ones doing the convincing, so they take a commission one way or another); usually involving people with not much money to begin with, just hungry for an opportunity to make some, willing to take bank credits or other forms of debt in order to "invest". It's all so lame.
- jacques_chester 9y ago
  Luckily, I have the answer: a blockchain which records overhyped blockchains. This technology will make it possible to create an immutable, universal record that will exclude all falsehood. ICO imminent. Act now and receive a 20% bonus on your next overpromise.
- specialist 9y ago
  I retract my prior comment about giving Agora the benefit of the doubt. "...The Agora people appear smart, earnest. So maybe there's something here." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16599728 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16599728 Voting systems are like catnip for both conspiracy theorists and charlatan's. It's nutty making. Sometimes I wonder which one I am. On the positive side, the Sierra Leone govt's refutation saves me the effort of debunking yet another hairball scheme.
beat 9y ago
I have yet to see how blockchain is supposed to solve problems with elections that can't be solved with good process. And if process isn't fixed, I don't see how blockchain alone will get around the process shortcomings. Elections are no different than any other info security problem. Multiple checks at multiple locations in the process. Blockchain is not magic pixie dust that makes info security issues go away.
- bdamm 9y ago
  It's almost like people are thinking of blockchain as a global immutable append-only log with source attribution. Then the main question is, is what you're willing to pay to append a record more than what the operators (miners) are willing to accept to append a record? In the case of elections, I don't know a lot of governments that would be willing to pay to do what they do for free today.
  - hudon 9y ago
    Not only that, but the blockchain is not even immutable... Forks happen all the time and the developers end up arbitrarily choosing which fork is the real blockchain. Anyone that was using the other fork in the meantime sees their chain mutate (gets wiped out, essentially) or be given a different name. So basically even IF the blockchain was not costly, the nation would need to control the developers to control the blockchain in the case of consensus failure (fork) to make sure no one messes with the election results.
    - darawk 9y ago
      > Not only that, but the blockchain is not even immutable... Forks happen all the time and the developers end up arbitrarily choosing which fork is the real blockchain. Anyone that was using the other fork in the meantime sees their chain mutate (gets wiped out, essentially) or be given a different name. Yes they are. That's not what 'immutable' means. Immutability refers to an inability to change the past. Not an inability to fork the future. A blockchain is a persistent, immutable data structure. This is just a simple fact of computer science.
CryptoPunk 9y ago
Quite a different story from what the Agora team were telling: https://np.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/83v7x9/these_results_represent_the_first_time_a/dvl5f1y/ https://np.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/83v7x9/these_resul...
- danso 9y ago
  Here's a more relevant response, in which they comment on someone's submission of this article that disputes the use of blockchain in Sierra Leone: http://en.rfi.fr/africa/20180319-sierra-leones-electoral-commission-distances-itself-use-blockchain-during-polls http://en.rfi.fr/africa/20180319-sierra-leones-electoral-com... https://np.reddit.com/r/agora/comments/85k6cx/sierra_leones_electoral_commission_distances/ https://np.reddit.com/r/agora/comments/85k6cx/sierra_leones_... Agora makes zero attempt to rebut the claims with evidence, and instead, attack the source: > Through research we have found that username "Tamba Lamin", who is the main source of this article, is from a competing service. You can do your own research into his position by Googling the username and "election". We do our part to not incite witch-hunts or dox users so please do not either but he used his real name on our channels and we have no other way to reference it. The article by Tamba Lamin is just one of more than a dozen articles listed in the cited post that argue against Agora. This is not a great response from the Agora team (posted below for posterity): Hi /u/custom1made, we welcome both positive and negative feedback on our company so we can continue to learn, earn trust, and grow. Our continued success will attract many unsavory characters that will attack us - we must remain professional, honest, and composed - and hope to foster a community that agrees to that mantra. We are very much hoping you will do your part in helping us stay strong so we can focus on our mission to bring transparent Democracy to the world. Through research we have found that username "Tamba Lamin", who is the main source of this article, is from a competing service. You can do your own research into his position by Googling the username and "election". We do our part to not incite witch-hunts or dox users so please do not either but he used his real name on our channels and we have no other way to reference it. Although his motives may have been questionable, he brought up important topics. We had an internal meeting about our stance on sensational subject titles, filters in place, and how we will handle incorrect information from third-party news organizations. Our intent is to set and keep the record straight. As stated in our pinned posts and in all of our Reddit posts, we do not verify the accuracy of third-party news reports. Thank you.
danso 9y ago
If it's the case that Sierra Leone did not use blockchain for any part of its election, I think TechCrunch needs to own up to its reporting, which seems very thinly sourced: https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/14/sierra-leone-just-ran-the-first-blockchain-based-election/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/14/sierra-leone-just-ran-the-... In fact, it seems completely sourced to "Leonardo Gammar of Agora", "Agora" being a company that is trying to sell its "blockchain-based digital voting solution" [0] and thus has every incentive to hype the usage of their product. The TC reporter apparently made no attempt to contact anyone who actually works in Sierra Leone's government/elections, or anyone who actually lives there. [0] https://agora.vote/#about https://agora.vote/#about edit: looks like the reporter has just decided to reach out to authorities: https://twitter.com/johnbiggs/status/975841632661786624 https://twitter.com/johnbiggs/status/975841632661786624 https://twitter.com/johnbiggs/status/975814093994151938 https://twitter.com/johnbiggs/status/975814093994151938 Quartz also wrote about Sierra Leone's alleged use of blockchain, and like TC, solely sources it to Agora: https://qz.com/1227050/sierra-leone-elections-powered-by-blockchain/ https://qz.com/1227050/sierra-leone-elections-powered-by-blo... It does link to this page though, from Agora: https://agora.vote/sierraleone2018/ https://agora.vote/sierraleone2018/ It is possible that Agora was accredited as an independent observer of results. But it's problematic that they use their Sierra Leone results page to advertise their services, which don't seem to have been used as described: > Agora is a Swiss foundation providing decentralized digital voting systems based on the blockchain technology. Agora’s solution will enable secure and remote voting from digital devices, as well as allow each voter to verify his or her untampered vote in the final count. When you go to Agora's "results" page, all you get is an aggregated tally of votes. I don't see a ledger of any kind: https://agora.vote/sierraleone2018/results https://agora.vote/sierraleone2018/results
apo 9y ago
Beware of Blockchain stories with unsubstantiated facts. The original story had many red flags, not the least of which being the use of the future tense in a quote by Gammar. “Anonymized votes/ballots are being recorded on Agora’s blockchain, which will be publicly available for any interested party to review, count and validate,” said Gammar. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16598210 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16598210 The space is littered with claims like this that turn out to be nonsense. Don't trust, verify.
yongjik 9y ago
Well, good, because I couldn't fathom why anyone would want to run an election using blockchain. Paper ballots with automated scanners is a solved problem. It works, it's cheap, and it's virtually tamper-proof. (Tampering with the result will require physical access by many people: if you allow that possibility you're basically conceding that you cannot trust the government to run the election properly, and using any technology won't save you.) In other words, paper ballots is a boring, unsexy technology whose only benefit is that it works. No wonder people aren't excited.
- hmcdona1 9y ago
  What? I agree it works, but it's pretty insecure. Paper ballots can just be swapped out for other paper ballots. With a public blockchain (or something like it) you could always look up your vote and by nature it cannot be changed. The vote count could be tallied instantly as well and recounts are unnecessary. Blockchains can't ensure no false votes are cast for deceased or unwilling participants, but it honestly would be better than paper in many ways. I am not advocating people use some third party token to do this. That I believe would be unnecessary. Am I missing something though? I don't understand the overwhelming hatred any blockchain related tech gets on HN. This is one area where I think it could provide real value.
  - jacques_chester 9y ago
    > With a public blockchain (or something like it) you could always look up your vote and by nature it cannot be changed. ... Am I missing something though? Ballot secrecy. Without it you get vote-buying and voter coercion. If you want to see what that looks like, ask your legislators about which lobbyists they met last week.
    - hmcdona1 9y ago
      Good point! If keys/addresses were assigned in secret, I don't see how blockchain forensics could identify someone given that voting is simply transactions going one way. The only way might be time, but that could be a big give away. There's also people providing their public address as proof of a vote in exchange for something, but the risk for the buyer is that someone just hands over someone else's transaction and votes as they please. A real potential solution would be to make the votes private and "untraceable" (A la Monero ring signatures or something of the sort), but that kind of comes with it's own pros and cons and could always be broken later. I still think it's worth investigating if this is more secure than plain old paper ballots.
microtherion 9y ago
Sierra Leone missed an opportunity here to embrace the hype and declare itself "The Crypto Jungle".
shpx 9y ago
https://youtu.be/ZDnShu5V99s?t=22m46s https://youtu.be/ZDnShu5V99s?t=22m46s is a good lecture about the cryptography of electronic voting.

161 points by portofcall 9y ago

The original story wasn't very clear how blockchain was involved. It seems very likely now with the NEC denying the claims that it was a bunch of hype. >“Agora’s results for the two districts they tallied differed considerably from the official results, according to an analysis of the two sets of statistics carried out by RFI,” >Was Agora simply attempting a PR stunt in support of its upcoming token sale. almost certainly

dwighttk 9y ago
for what it is worth, the indigenous Sierra Leone News site I follow has 0 references to "blockchain" and only one to "agora" (which doesn't seem to actually contain "agora") http://www.thesierraleonetelegraph.com/?s=blockchain http://www.thesierraleonetelegraph.com/?s=blockchain http://www.thesierraleonetelegraph.com/?s=agora http://www.thesierraleonetelegraph.com/?s=agora
- IncRnd 9y ago
  Not the OP. That's good information you posted. Thank you!
- rory096 9y ago
  >(which doesn't seem to actually contain "agora") I do believe that's a hit on "So Pythagoras was wrong?"
  - dwighttk 9y ago
    dangit Safari... you should show that when I cmd-f "agora"
GenericsMotors 9y ago
> The original story wasn't very clear how blockchain was involved. Didn't stop the ridiculously titled "Sierra Leone just ran the first blockchain-based election"[1] from being shared and strongly upvoted here on HN. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16622245 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16622245
- dwighttk 9y ago
  I voted it up. I read the article because I'm interested in Sierra Leone and was interested in keeping an eye on developments (like how exactly blockchain was involved)... I should probably raise my standards for upvoting.
- danso 9y ago
  You're linking to this thread; I think you mean to link to this one, which has 500+ upvotes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16598210 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16598210
  - GenericsMotors 9y ago
    Thanks, my mistake (and apparently too late to edit my original comment).
- rdiddly 9y ago
  Well I guess I need to update my opinion on that story from "Cool application of blockchains!" to "Would've been a cool application of blockchains!"
xorcist 9y ago
Why check your sources when you can publish both the outrageous article and then a retraction as well? Instant click doubling!

mozumder 9y ago

Good, because blockchain for elections is a TERRIBLE idea. A large state can hack election results just by having millions of computers perform blockchain proof-of-work on false election data.

popol12 9y ago
That's not true at all. The worst the state can do is to deny votes to be written in the blockchain by mining empty blocks. But no matter how much computing power it has, the state can't write false votes, thanks to public key cryptography. If transactions where cheaper, voting on a public blockchain like Bitcoin would be a great thing. That's not the case today, but I'm pretty sure it will be in the coming years.
- KenanSulayman 9y ago
  That’s not correct. The worst that can happen is falsifying votes before they’re written to the blockchain. And there’s nobody who will check the „blockchain“ for his vote, because people want to vote and get over with it.
- IncRnd 9y ago
  There are many ways to subvert blockchains, especially being the authority in charge of data entry, without breaking crypto.
rebuilder 9y ago
This sounds like an argument against rolling your own blockchain instead of using an existing, highly secure one. Not that I'm convinced blockchains are the proper tool for the job. BTW, is it too late to stop using the word "blockchain" like it's something that can be bottled up and sold? I believe an article is required.
malikNF 9y ago
These guys, https://www.democracy.earth/ https://www.democracy.earth/ changed my view on using the blockchain for voting. I think its a really cool project, may be they might help you change your mind too.

Analemma_ 9y ago

This is actually good for Bitcoin. (Edit: guess I should've stuck the /s at the end of this)

Sangermaine 9y ago

Hard to believe unverified hype or outright deception is involved in something relating to blockchain technology.

inetknght 9y ago
Missing /s
- IncRnd 9y ago
  Actually, that appeared to be a pithy comment not requiring a sarcasm tag.
- roflchoppa 9y ago
  nah its not missing the /s tag, ive seen similar advertisements on Daly City Bart above the ATM machines.
mattigames 9y ago
I live in a third world country (Colombia) and the scammy hype is even here, people at cafes telling each other to "invest" in BTC and the other crypto currencies, usually through a middlemen (the ones doing the convincing, so they take a commission one way or another); usually involving people with not much money to begin with, just hungry for an opportunity to make some, willing to take bank credits or other forms of debt in order to "invest". It's all so lame.
jacques_chester 9y ago
Luckily, I have the answer: a blockchain which records overhyped blockchains. This technology will make it possible to create an immutable, universal record that will exclude all falsehood. ICO imminent. Act now and receive a 20% bonus on your next overpromise.
specialist 9y ago
I retract my prior comment about giving Agora the benefit of the doubt. "...The Agora people appear smart, earnest. So maybe there's something here." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16599728 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16599728 Voting systems are like catnip for both conspiracy theorists and charlatan's. It's nutty making. Sometimes I wonder which one I am. On the positive side, the Sierra Leone govt's refutation saves me the effort of debunking yet another hairball scheme.

beat 9y ago

I have yet to see how blockchain is supposed to solve problems with elections that can't be solved with good process. And if process isn't fixed, I don't see how blockchain alone will get around the process shortcomings. Elections are no different than any other info security problem. Multiple checks at multiple locations in the process. Blockchain is not magic pixie dust that makes info security issues go away.

bdamm 9y ago
It's almost like people are thinking of blockchain as a global immutable append-only log with source attribution. Then the main question is, is what you're willing to pay to append a record more than what the operators (miners) are willing to accept to append a record? In the case of elections, I don't know a lot of governments that would be willing to pay to do what they do for free today.
- hudon 9y ago
  Not only that, but the blockchain is not even immutable... Forks happen all the time and the developers end up arbitrarily choosing which fork is the real blockchain. Anyone that was using the other fork in the meantime sees their chain mutate (gets wiped out, essentially) or be given a different name. So basically even IF the blockchain was not costly, the nation would need to control the developers to control the blockchain in the case of consensus failure (fork) to make sure no one messes with the election results.
  - darawk 9y ago
    > Not only that, but the blockchain is not even immutable... Forks happen all the time and the developers end up arbitrarily choosing which fork is the real blockchain. Anyone that was using the other fork in the meantime sees their chain mutate (gets wiped out, essentially) or be given a different name. Yes they are. That's not what 'immutable' means. Immutability refers to an inability to change the past. Not an inability to fork the future. A blockchain is a persistent, immutable data structure. This is just a simple fact of computer science.

CryptoPunk 9y ago

Quite a different story from what the Agora team were telling: https://np.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/83v7x9/these_results_represent_the_first_time_a/dvl5f1y/ https://np.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/83v7x9/these_resul...

danso 9y ago
Here's a more relevant response, in which they comment on someone's submission of this article that disputes the use of blockchain in Sierra Leone: http://en.rfi.fr/africa/20180319-sierra-leones-electoral-commission-distances-itself-use-blockchain-during-polls http://en.rfi.fr/africa/20180319-sierra-leones-electoral-com... https://np.reddit.com/r/agora/comments/85k6cx/sierra_leones_electoral_commission_distances/ https://np.reddit.com/r/agora/comments/85k6cx/sierra_leones_... Agora makes zero attempt to rebut the claims with evidence, and instead, attack the source: > Through research we have found that username "Tamba Lamin", who is the main source of this article, is from a competing service. You can do your own research into his position by Googling the username and "election". We do our part to not incite witch-hunts or dox users so please do not either but he used his real name on our channels and we have no other way to reference it. The article by Tamba Lamin is just one of more than a dozen articles listed in the cited post that argue against Agora. This is not a great response from the Agora team (posted below for posterity): Hi /u/custom1made, we welcome both positive and negative feedback on our company so we can continue to learn, earn trust, and grow. Our continued success will attract many unsavory characters that will attack us - we must remain professional, honest, and composed - and hope to foster a community that agrees to that mantra. We are very much hoping you will do your part in helping us stay strong so we can focus on our mission to bring transparent Democracy to the world. Through research we have found that username "Tamba Lamin", who is the main source of this article, is from a competing service. You can do your own research into his position by Googling the username and "election". We do our part to not incite witch-hunts or dox users so please do not either but he used his real name on our channels and we have no other way to reference it. Although his motives may have been questionable, he brought up important topics. We had an internal meeting about our stance on sensational subject titles, filters in place, and how we will handle incorrect information from third-party news organizations. Our intent is to set and keep the record straight. As stated in our pinned posts and in all of our Reddit posts, we do not verify the accuracy of third-party news reports. Thank you.

danso 9y ago

If it's the case that Sierra Leone did not use blockchain for any part of its election, I think TechCrunch needs to own up to its reporting, which seems very thinly sourced: https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/14/sierra-leone-just-ran-the-first-blockchain-based-election/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/14/sierra-leone-just-ran-the-... In fact, it seems completely sourced to "Leonardo Gammar of Agora", "Agora" being a company that is trying to sell its "blockchain-based digital voting solution" [0] and thus has every incentive to hype the usage of their product. The TC reporter apparently made no attempt to contact anyone who actually works in Sierra Leone's government/elections, or anyone who actually lives there. [0] https://agora.vote/#about https://agora.vote/#about edit: looks like the reporter has just decided to reach out to authorities: https://twitter.com/johnbiggs/status/975841632661786624 https://twitter.com/johnbiggs/status/975841632661786624 https://twitter.com/johnbiggs/status/975814093994151938 https://twitter.com/johnbiggs/status/975814093994151938 Quartz also wrote about Sierra Leone's alleged use of blockchain, and like TC, solely sources it to Agora: https://qz.com/1227050/sierra-leone-elections-powered-by-blockchain/ https://qz.com/1227050/sierra-leone-elections-powered-by-blo... It does link to this page though, from Agora: https://agora.vote/sierraleone2018/ https://agora.vote/sierraleone2018/ It is possible that Agora was accredited as an independent observer of results. But it's problematic that they use their Sierra Leone results page to advertise their services, which don't seem to have been used as described: > Agora is a Swiss foundation providing decentralized digital voting systems based on the blockchain technology. Agora’s solution will enable secure and remote voting from digital devices, as well as allow each voter to verify his or her untampered vote in the final count. When you go to Agora's "results" page, all you get is an aggregated tally of votes. I don't see a ledger of any kind: https://agora.vote/sierraleone2018/results https://agora.vote/sierraleone2018/results

apo 9y ago

Beware of Blockchain stories with unsubstantiated facts. The original story had many red flags, not the least of which being the use of the future tense in a quote by Gammar. “Anonymized votes/ballots are being recorded on Agora’s blockchain, which will be publicly available for any interested party to review, count and validate,” said Gammar. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16598210 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16598210 The space is littered with claims like this that turn out to be nonsense. Don't trust, verify.

yongjik 9y ago

Well, good, because I couldn't fathom why anyone would want to run an election using blockchain. Paper ballots with automated scanners is a solved problem. It works, it's cheap, and it's virtually tamper-proof. (Tampering with the result will require physical access by many people: if you allow that possibility you're basically conceding that you cannot trust the government to run the election properly, and using any technology won't save you.) In other words, paper ballots is a boring, unsexy technology whose only benefit is that it works. No wonder people aren't excited.

hmcdona1 9y ago
What? I agree it works, but it's pretty insecure. Paper ballots can just be swapped out for other paper ballots. With a public blockchain (or something like it) you could always look up your vote and by nature it cannot be changed. The vote count could be tallied instantly as well and recounts are unnecessary. Blockchains can't ensure no false votes are cast for deceased or unwilling participants, but it honestly would be better than paper in many ways. I am not advocating people use some third party token to do this. That I believe would be unnecessary. Am I missing something though? I don't understand the overwhelming hatred any blockchain related tech gets on HN. This is one area where I think it could provide real value.
- jacques_chester 9y ago
  > With a public blockchain (or something like it) you could always look up your vote and by nature it cannot be changed. ... Am I missing something though? Ballot secrecy. Without it you get vote-buying and voter coercion. If you want to see what that looks like, ask your legislators about which lobbyists they met last week.
  - hmcdona1 9y ago
    Good point! If keys/addresses were assigned in secret, I don't see how blockchain forensics could identify someone given that voting is simply transactions going one way. The only way might be time, but that could be a big give away. There's also people providing their public address as proof of a vote in exchange for something, but the risk for the buyer is that someone just hands over someone else's transaction and votes as they please. A real potential solution would be to make the votes private and "untraceable" (A la Monero ring signatures or something of the sort), but that kind of comes with it's own pros and cons and could always be broken later. I still think it's worth investigating if this is more secure than plain old paper ballots.

microtherion 9y ago

Sierra Leone missed an opportunity here to embrace the hype and declare itself "The Crypto Jungle".

shpx 9y ago

https://youtu.be/ZDnShu5V99s?t=22m46s https://youtu.be/ZDnShu5V99s?t=22m46s is a good lecture about the cryptography of electronic voting.