2 ms·

> Feel free to educate me regarding how "it" works if you feel my opinion is in error. https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/670.pdf https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/670.pd

by darawk 8y ago

> Feel free to educate me regarding how "it" works if you feel my opinion is in error. https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/670.pdf https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/670.pdf > It seems unlikely that any system will constructed any time soon which doesn't involve onerous secret key distribution, is provably correct, doesn't allow someone to prove after the fact to a third party that they voted a certain way, is secure against insider and outside manipulation, Paper ballots aren't secure against insider or outsider manipulation and they definitely aren't provably correct. I don't see any reason why it should be necessary for the average person to understand how the system works. It should be sufficient that they can verify it, given sufficient knowledge.

grzm 8y ago
> ”I don't see any reason why it should be necessary for the average person to understand how the system works” It’s important so people have faith in the system. Yes, verifiability can help with that, but trust in math that few can really understand is a barrier. This can be exacerbated as distrust in algorithmic feed generation and social media manipulation grows. You’re savvy enough to see beyond this, but that’s not the point: that trust needs to be solid and widespread for people to have faith in the process. This is a human issue, not a technical one.
- darawk 8y ago
  I simply disagree. Yes, the transition will be difficult due to the issue of comprehension. But I think there is a fundamental difference between these things. Of course, there will be a handful of people that never believe it's legitimate, and insist that it's not. But you can simply direct them to the papers - which they won't read, but it's hard for an ecosystem to form around something that is provably false. E.g. sure, there are flat-earthers, but they don't make up a sizable political bloc.

by darawk 8y ago

grzm 8y ago

> ”I don't see any reason why it should be necessary for the average person to understand how the system works” It’s important so people have faith in the system. Yes, verifiability can help with that, but trust in math that few can really understand is a barrier. This can be exacerbated as distrust in algorithmic feed generation and social media manipulation grows. You’re savvy enough to see beyond this, but that’s not the point: that trust needs to be solid and widespread for people to have faith in the process. This is a human issue, not a technical one.

darawk 8y ago
I simply disagree. Yes, the transition will be difficult due to the issue of comprehension. But I think there is a fundamental difference between these things. Of course, there will be a handful of people that never believe it's legitimate, and insist that it's not. But you can simply direct them to the papers - which they won't read, but it's hard for an ecosystem to form around something that is provably false. E.g. sure, there are flat-earthers, but they don't make up a sizable political bloc.