4 ms·

For the most part, this seems like a pretty reasonable application of homomorphic cryptography to act as an extra voting record. Like others here I think it wo

For the most part, this seems like a pretty reasonable application of homomorphic cryptography to act as an extra voting record. Like others here I think it would need to be secondary to the paper voting record, and I worry that would be hard to enforce forever. But one line stands out as particularly troubling: Our sample reference will showcase how people can make their selections at home, where they can easily research their choices, then bring a QR code to the polling place to scan and pre-populate their ballot. On the one hand, I support the goal of making it easier for people to research and select their choices. But the risk of enabling a "scan-to-vote" operation is pretty clear: voters will be given their QR codes pre-populated by some interested third party.

abathur 7y ago
This is a good point. I don't mean this as a what-about, but it's worth noting: any ballots that list the party of the candidates or offer single-action straight-party votes are effectively a subtle form of a ballot pre-populated by an interested party.
asdfman123 7y ago
I have at times followed an election guide verbatim. It's far more rational than voting straight ticket. If it means it's easier to vote for those overwhelmed by all the various choices out there, then that's a win. If it means you can get your average millennial or Generation-Z friend to vote, someone who cares about social issues but can't be bothered to learn about local judges -- then that's a good thing. It could mean more accurate representation. It's better than letting the richest and most idle determine everything.
rando444 7y ago
Yes, but there is no proof that the user actually used that QR to make their vote. This diminishes the incentive to buy votes because there is no verifiable proof of how someone voted. I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, but it's more secure than mail-in ballots, which are currently in use and popular in many locations.
- AgentME 7y ago
  The issue isn't that someone can force you to vote a certain way or check that you voted in some way. The issue is that someone can make it outrageously convenient for you to make a whole set of uninformed votes. Imagine you're very busy and haven't spent the time yet to figure out what to vote for. Someone tells you that if you vote a certain way, it will be great for a certain pet issue that you care about, and they give you (and many others) a QR code. The QR code contains a vote for one candidate who cares about the pet issue, but the rest of the votes in the QR code are all oriented around a different issue that you don't know about, don't care about, or actively care the other way about, but you don't notice and scan it and vote it as-is. Mail-in ballots don't have that issue.

abathur 7y ago

This is a good point. I don't mean this as a what-about, but it's worth noting: any ballots that list the party of the candidates or offer single-action straight-party votes are effectively a subtle form of a ballot pre-populated by an interested party.

asdfman123 7y ago

I have at times followed an election guide verbatim. It's far more rational than voting straight ticket. If it means it's easier to vote for those overwhelmed by all the various choices out there, then that's a win. If it means you can get your average millennial or Generation-Z friend to vote, someone who cares about social issues but can't be bothered to learn about local judges -- then that's a good thing. It could mean more accurate representation. It's better than letting the richest and most idle determine everything.

rando444 7y ago

Yes, but there is no proof that the user actually used that QR to make their vote. This diminishes the incentive to buy votes because there is no verifiable proof of how someone voted. I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, but it's more secure than mail-in ballots, which are currently in use and popular in many locations.

AgentME 7y ago
The issue isn't that someone can force you to vote a certain way or check that you voted in some way. The issue is that someone can make it outrageously convenient for you to make a whole set of uninformed votes. Imagine you're very busy and haven't spent the time yet to figure out what to vote for. Someone tells you that if you vote a certain way, it will be great for a certain pet issue that you care about, and they give you (and many others) a QR code. The QR code contains a vote for one candidate who cares about the pet issue, but the rest of the votes in the QR code are all oriented around a different issue that you don't know about, don't care about, or actively care the other way about, but you don't notice and scan it and vote it as-is. Mail-in ballots don't have that issue.