3 ms·
Imagine it's voting day, you go to a polling location and sign in to verify that you are a real person and allowed to vote. They generate a private/public key f
by seanalltogether 8y ago
Imagine it's voting day, you go to a polling location and sign in to verify that you are a real person and allowed to vote. They generate a private/public key for you on the spot and hand it to you without officially linking your name and key together on the record, so your vote can remain anonymous. (Or maybe you're even allowed to generate your own and let polling station just verify the public key) You vote for who you want, sign the vote with your private key and then keep your public key for your own personal records. Your vote is added to a master database and made publicly available for anyone to verify. You can give your public key to anyone you trust to validate your vote, or just look it up yourself to make sure nothing was altered.
Now how does running this mechanism through a P2P blockchain make this more efficient, or more resilient against corruption?
- ericpauley 8y agoYour proposed system fails at one of the most essential properties of voting, repudiation. Voters must not be able to prove who they voted for, or they could be coerced to vote a certain way.
- kjeetgill 8y agoOops. I posted about the same scheme before reading yours. Sorry. One nice property of the Git-like Merkel-Tree half of the blockchain I do understand is that it's stupid easy to say: at this time, this was the state of the world and nothing in the past changed. (Just like git-commits though more robust than sha1s). It's harder to mess with than a giant DHT. As for all the other bits of blockchain, I'm out of my depth.
- tormeh 8y agoHow do I know that the vote I'm verifying is the one that's used to count votes?