5 ms·
> Electronic voting systems using zero knowledge proofs are superior to paper votes because it's possible to check for yourself that your vote was actually coun
by M2Ys4U 5y ago
> Electronic voting systems using zero knowledge proofs are superior to paper votes because it's possible to check for yourself that your vote was actually counted and not ignored.
Which means somebody can hold a gun to your head and force you to prove that you voted and that your vote counted.
That is not, to put it mildly, desirable in an election.
- charcircuit 5y agoYou can already do that with mail in ballots easily. Someone could also threaten you to record yourself filling out a paper ballot.
- M2Ys4U 5y agoYes, which is why I also dislike postal voting and want to minimise its use.
- teagoat 5y agoWhat does postal voting have to do with that? they could also force you to film yourself at a polling station...
- M2Ys4U 5y agoWell at least where I live (the UK), it's illegal to film in a polling station and the staff in the polling stations should be looking out for that and reporting it. More importantly (with both postal voting and in-person voting) it's impossible to perform these attacks after the fact, but if you have a receipt of your vote it can be done at any time after you vote.
- danuker 5y agoUnless they also demand that you film yourself continuously up to putting the envelope in a mailbox, they can't be sure you actually mailed the ballot or that you didn't invalidate the result later. This would risk exposing yourself, and in turn, the intimidator. But if only one ballot is mailed per citizen, they can be reasonably sure you didn't vote for the competition.