[shiado]

That's exactly my point. This article is critiquing ancient technology which can be tampered with by the ruling government that limits democratic involvement without proposing obvious remedies involving superior technology. The hidden subtext here through the intellectual dishonesty of its exclusion is that this technology would allow a little bit TOO much involvement from the electorate which is contrary to the entire design of American representative democracy which is purpose built to prop up candidates captured by big money corporate donors and PACs.

[ardy42]

This isn't a technical problem that can be solved by technical solutions, and even technical solutions can be tampered with.

Everyone understands paper ballot technology. Very, very few people are going to understand a technically "superior" e-voting system that has all the right characteristics. I'd rather have the system that can be accurately understood verified by the public than one where the public has to completely trust a few dozen experts.