this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2026
310 points (98.1% liked)
Technology
87446 readers
3740 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nothing alike. Voting is a trust issue, and while we have several trust based systems, it's very hard to implement a system where even if the users don't trust the system itself they can trust the result it produces. That's the issue with electronic voting, trust that is placed in manual vote counting volunteers supervised by representatives of every party is small, because you only need to trust that each box was counted correctly. When you aggregate all those small trusts into a singular system, which even if divided in machines, is still a singular entity, then it's impossible to trust the centralised system enough, and it must be incredibly robust to prove to every individual that their vote was cast correctly.
I proposed a system like that in my last comment, but I still wouldn't trust such a system simply because the risk someone phishing the machines on voting day is so high, even if it has close to zero probability, that we can't risk it.