[dnos]

I like your thought, but if a voter can lookup their vote to confirm it got counted correctly with some form of receipt, then it opens the door for vote buying.

I’m not sure if there’s a way around that, but it would be awesome to be able to absolutely prove all votes were correctly counted.

[mgoetzke]

that is why multiple people in the office of different political factions count the votes. And they are also present all the time. Otherwise you can simply do it the Russian way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oSeRyaFllY

[tijl]

I think what dnos means by vote buying, is not that somebody bribes the people who count the votes, but that somebody bribes the voters. If a politician now approaches me and promises me to pay me if I vote for him, he can't really be sure I actually did vote for him. Nobody but me knows what happens in the voting booth. He could ask me to take a picture, but I could still change my vote after the picture was taken.

[mgoetzke]

sure .. that is possible. But all bribing is a matter of attenuation. One would want to spend as little money possible to change the outcome. Bribing voters is the most expensive version, one with the highest risk of being found out, and least verifiable. Paying off the people counting in each district is once removed in these risks. Attacking the people up the chain (that sum up many districts) is the next level etc.

At every step of this way, if there is software involved it becomes instantly easier and less risky to influence. Whether it is online voting, voting machines, vote counting software, tabulation software, emailing results upwards etc.