[IGI-111]

So I suppose my stance that the benefits of online voting for direct democracy largely outweight the complexity cost of a sufficiently secure solution are equivalent to the older type of objectivists who realize that free market isn't perfect but that it does lead to better outcomes in most cases.

That we can't produce secure voting software is just a testament to how much we suck at software engineering and making safe computers in general, because cryptographically this is a solved problem.

Hell I'd argue that modern implementations like Estonia's are pretty close to an acceptable standard of trustlessness. But that's thanks to open standards and public ledgers. The closed source voting machine was never a good idea, and never will be.

Given the ancap vibe of blockchain in general this is all a bit ironic isn't it?

[notfromhere]

online voting is a solution in search of a problem. Digital voting just makes it vulnerable to hacking and the general public barely understands how computer works.

Paper ballots are cheap and auditable, and can be understood by anyone that knows how to count.