Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
ted (not lasso)
@ted
pretty cool that the election has spurred my /all-in groupchat to talk more about blockchain — first w/ @polymarket and now w/ voting: "can someone steelman why voting should not be done via blockchain?" the answers are switching costs, implementation, security, etc. someone said privacy to which zk was the reply.
10 replies
0 recast
32 reactions
links 🏴
@links
TBH I feel it will be a long time before we can use blockchain to vote in municipal/state elections. Democratic voting needs to be auditable, private, and non-coercible (can’t pay for votes). This means we need zk tech. I think it’s going to be a long time before the average person trusts zk tech. The average person might not see crypto as “better” either, compared to alternatives. Not unless there were some big events which showed our current voting system is truly broken. …I may have just convinced myself it could happen quickly. But in absence of a voting scandal, I think we will need to see zk tech being used in other contexts before it gets trusted enough to use for voting.
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
gFam.live (UrbanGladiator)
@gfam
You've hit on the right themes : auditable, private and non-coercible are huge issues to solve. I think the device matters a lot... a mobile phone could be hacked to get user blockchain credentials or someone could force you to log in and then vote for you. Polling stations have security so it's much harder to cooerce or impersonate.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
