6 ms·
If you define "third party" as your first link does, everything relies on trust in a third party. The counting of ballots also relies on a third party, albeit a
by sebmellen 6y ago
If you define "third party" as your first link does, everything relies on trust in a third party. The counting of ballots also relies on a third party, albeit a less homogenous and "centralized" third party (though that term is also hard to define).
The difference is that a public blockchain provides an open and auditable overview of the actions of the third party, and what the state of the entire "database" is. This is something that a Merkle tree whose root is published in a newspaper once a week can't achieve (an anecdote from a story Roberto Di Cosmo of the Software Heritage Foundation told me).
To your second link — I'm not arguing for such a system today. Of course there are many roadblocks and hurdles in getting to full proof-of-stake or full "decentralization". But in 5-10 years I'm sure we'll be there. There are hundreds of teams, from Algorand to Casper to Ethereum, working on this issue.
- xorcist 6y ago> The counting of ballots also relies on a third party, A third party counting all ballots, unless audited, would be a terrible way to conduct a public vote. In pen-and-paper voting systems, counting is carried out by the very same people that vote, publicly, in the open. Then there are also auditing systems in place.