About voting systems
There are a lot of interesting ideas on how to make the results of the test verifiable, but for some reason, all of them are excessively complex and often do not inspire confidence, leaving the feeling that these are special, distracting passes of magicians-illusionists. For example . And after reading this post, I could not go past.
Why the whole garden when you can make it easier and more reliable?
All you need to do is open the voting results and anonymize the data!
Problems and solutions:
There must be a person who will assure and give you a “Voice”. That's it, he and only he will be initiated into your secret. Moreover, he does not need to know your last name. Your passport can be checked by another person. This process is very easy to automate, completely eliminating the involvement of a dedicated person. Nowhere should the correspondence of your identifier of your identity be recorded.
In the "Voice" it is not at all necessary to indicate your surname and first name. In the case of an incorrect accounting of your choice, it is not at all necessary to go to the court or the CEC yourself and make unnecessary movements. It is enough to pass the “Voice” to your favorite party or candidate. They will figure it out. It is in their interest.
Stuffing. It may suddenly turn out that in our country there are an additional 50 million voters who voted for their beloved party / candidate in a single rush. Even in this case, the result of calculations can deviate from reality not so significantly, since the stuffing is not a substitute, and its capabilities are fundamentally limited by statistics and common sense.
You can detect the stuffing by simply controlling the number of voters in the open list. This number should match the number of real voters. A certain percentage of the discrepancy, I think, should be recognized as acceptable, mistakes happen, we are all human. This specific percentage to publish in advance, before the election. And take it not from the ceiling, but calculate it using the theory of probability and statistics. In the event of serious deviations, the election should be invalidated.
Only voters can be counted and published. This will also make sure that my vote is counted correctly. If I did not vote, then I should not find myself on the list. To exclude the stuffing, it is necessary to accurately calculate the number of real (present) voters in each precinct. This can be done reliably, with multiple duplication by comparing the independent measurements of representatives from each party / candidate. Ultimately, only the total amount in the country matters, which each party / candidate must calculate independently.
An employer or gangsters or someone else who has influence over you may demand to show or even convey to him your “correct” “Voice”. It is sad. But this can and must be fought. This is a flagrant violation of your guaranteed rights. And today, some employers may demand that a photograph taken with a mobile phone of the “correctly” filled out ballot. Although after this there is still the opportunity to spoil the newsletter or take a new one, should we stoop to such petty fraud? Situations are different, and it is not for us to judge, for example, a single mother who is afraid of losing her job. Therefore, consider. It is technically possible to give you not a fake, but a real “Voice” of a person who has already voted as necessary. The identity of the voter is not revealed to you. "Voice" when copying will not be two. In this case, the risk of exposure is almost zero. Only if you work for one employer, and he is not too lazy to compare the identifiers of all the “Voices” received by extortion. However, it is still not clear whose "Voice" is genuine and where is the copy.
The generation of identifiers should be implemented immediately. You must first see your identifier, and then make your choice, and in no case, not vice versa! This is especially true for automated systems. Otherwise, a situation may arise when the whole country voted for the “wrong” party / candidate with one “Voice” with one identifier. "Voice" when copying does not become two. The lack of voters can be compensated by throwing in, therefore, once again, first you get your identifier, then you make a choice, and in no case not vice versa!
The list in the public domain should be available all at once. That is, I should be able to download the entire list, for example, in the form of a database, in order to calculate for myself (one SQL command who understands) for whom, how much, and how much in total. If, for example, on the site you can, by entering your identifier, find out who he voted for, but you can’t get the whole list, then this means that you are not trusted to consider, but they yourself consider it “right”.
The dynamics and results of the election may change if special measures are not taken to protect against information leakage. The person who will give us the votes can quietly count the votes and in real time post the intermediate results on the same twitter, for example. One or more of these leaks will not play a special role, but if this flow is picked up and saddled by the media, this may affect the course of the elections. I got up this way for dinner, gathered at the polling station, and the election progress was already visible on TV, and it was already clear who had won. Does it make sense now to go? Or vote like everyone, just in case? But this problem is easily solved organizationally.
Why the whole garden when you can make it easier and more reliable?
All you need to do is open the voting results and anonymize the data!
- Enter a special identifier (a random set of numbers and, possibly, letters, out of order). Bulletins are already numbered, but another meaning is embedded in the identifier.
- Each voter should be given a document protected from fakes that fixes his choice (let's call him “Voice”, with a capital letter and in quotation marks) so that he does not change his mind and, if anything, could prove that his vote was not taken into account correctly. It can be just a certified copy of the completed newsletter.
- Publish (for example, on the website) voting results: identifier and corresponding choice in the open list.
Problems and solutions:
There must be a person who will assure and give you a “Voice”. That's it, he and only he will be initiated into your secret. Moreover, he does not need to know your last name. Your passport can be checked by another person. This process is very easy to automate, completely eliminating the involvement of a dedicated person. Nowhere should the correspondence of your identifier of your identity be recorded.
In the "Voice" it is not at all necessary to indicate your surname and first name. In the case of an incorrect accounting of your choice, it is not at all necessary to go to the court or the CEC yourself and make unnecessary movements. It is enough to pass the “Voice” to your favorite party or candidate. They will figure it out. It is in their interest.
Stuffing. It may suddenly turn out that in our country there are an additional 50 million voters who voted for their beloved party / candidate in a single rush. Even in this case, the result of calculations can deviate from reality not so significantly, since the stuffing is not a substitute, and its capabilities are fundamentally limited by statistics and common sense.
You can detect the stuffing by simply controlling the number of voters in the open list. This number should match the number of real voters. A certain percentage of the discrepancy, I think, should be recognized as acceptable, mistakes happen, we are all human. This specific percentage to publish in advance, before the election. And take it not from the ceiling, but calculate it using the theory of probability and statistics. In the event of serious deviations, the election should be invalidated.
Only voters can be counted and published. This will also make sure that my vote is counted correctly. If I did not vote, then I should not find myself on the list. To exclude the stuffing, it is necessary to accurately calculate the number of real (present) voters in each precinct. This can be done reliably, with multiple duplication by comparing the independent measurements of representatives from each party / candidate. Ultimately, only the total amount in the country matters, which each party / candidate must calculate independently.
An employer or gangsters or someone else who has influence over you may demand to show or even convey to him your “correct” “Voice”. It is sad. But this can and must be fought. This is a flagrant violation of your guaranteed rights. And today, some employers may demand that a photograph taken with a mobile phone of the “correctly” filled out ballot. Although after this there is still the opportunity to spoil the newsletter or take a new one, should we stoop to such petty fraud? Situations are different, and it is not for us to judge, for example, a single mother who is afraid of losing her job. Therefore, consider. It is technically possible to give you not a fake, but a real “Voice” of a person who has already voted as necessary. The identity of the voter is not revealed to you. "Voice" when copying will not be two. In this case, the risk of exposure is almost zero. Only if you work for one employer, and he is not too lazy to compare the identifiers of all the “Voices” received by extortion. However, it is still not clear whose "Voice" is genuine and where is the copy.
The generation of identifiers should be implemented immediately. You must first see your identifier, and then make your choice, and in no case, not vice versa! This is especially true for automated systems. Otherwise, a situation may arise when the whole country voted for the “wrong” party / candidate with one “Voice” with one identifier. "Voice" when copying does not become two. The lack of voters can be compensated by throwing in, therefore, once again, first you get your identifier, then you make a choice, and in no case not vice versa!
The list in the public domain should be available all at once. That is, I should be able to download the entire list, for example, in the form of a database, in order to calculate for myself (one SQL command who understands) for whom, how much, and how much in total. If, for example, on the site you can, by entering your identifier, find out who he voted for, but you can’t get the whole list, then this means that you are not trusted to consider, but they yourself consider it “right”.
The dynamics and results of the election may change if special measures are not taken to protect against information leakage. The person who will give us the votes can quietly count the votes and in real time post the intermediate results on the same twitter, for example. One or more of these leaks will not play a special role, but if this flow is picked up and saddled by the media, this may affect the course of the elections. I got up this way for dinner, gathered at the polling station, and the election progress was already visible on TV, and it was already clear who had won. Does it make sense now to go? Or vote like everyone, just in case? But this problem is easily solved organizationally.