[qrbLPHiKpiux]

> Blockchain for voting sounds like a terrible invitation to a terrible party.

I'm expecting a ton of down-votes into oblivion for the following...

Because you can "chip it" doesn't mean you should.

And, just because you can apply technology to something, also doesn't mean you should.

Time and time again we are shown how vulnerable computers and digital data are.

Voting should be done on paper in local areas overseen by people from each party. They all watch the ballot box. They all see who comes in. Together, they count the votes in front of everyone else and tally them on a piece of paper. Then, they call to their higher-ups these numbers, and so on and so forth.

This is the safest way for anyone to vote.

[chillacy]

Electronic voting would be extremely convenient, and could do wonders for voter participation rates. I trust my entire net worth to computer systems, why can computers sum up bank statements but not votes?

[the_snooze]

Financial transactions are frequent, reversible, insured, and don't require parties to be anonymous.

Elections are one-off events where after-the-fact mitigations reduce its validity. Plus, elections require strong privacy (i.e., voters shouldn't be able to reliably show how they voted).

Elections have far tougher constraints than finance.