4 ms·
I think you'd do it in a way that you can verify your own vote, but nobody else's, the government can see all the votes, but not who voted what, so they're priv
by eloff 7y ago
I think you'd do it in a way that you can verify your own vote, but nobody else's, the government can see all the votes, but not who voted what, so they're private. Then you'd have some kind of confirmation system (e.g. paper receipts which are kept at the polling stations and statistically sampled to look for irregularities. You wouldn't have to check every receipt to be sure there was no funny business to a high degree of certainty.
- JohnFen 7y agoI don't see how that addresses my concern, though. What I'm saying is that a system that relies on the voters themselves to validate that their vote was properly recorded is a system that won't work, because voters won't do that in sufficient numbers.
- eloff 7y agoStatistically, you wouldn't need many people to validate it to have high confidence there was no funny business.
- JohnFen 7y agoBut you would need to ensure that your sample was statistically representative, which means that you shouldn't allow voters to self-select whether or not their vote is in the sample. I would add that (at least in my state), validating a sample of votes to provide an indication of a problem has been done for at least as long as I've been alive, so we already have that. But my state doesn't use electronic voting machines.