Election System Based on the Blockchain?

[tyz]

I just thought about what could be realized by using blockchain technology. I came across that the blockchain could help to create a secure, distributed and not manipulable election system. Every (encrypted) vote must be verified by at least a particular amount of peers before it counts like a transaction. What do you think? Is such a system conceivable?

[1715021714]

1715021714

[1715021714]

1715021714

[1715021714]

1715021714

[1715021714]

1715021714

[1715021714]

1715021714

[MicroGuy]

I just thought about what could be realized by using blockchain technology. I came across that the blockchain could help to create a secure, distributed and not manipulable election system. Every (encrypted) vote must be verified by at least a particular amount of peers before it counts like a transaction. What do you think? Is such a system conceivable?

Yes. Something like this should be adapted to steer the development of Bitcoin. We must break free from the ISIS coding regime.

[Jeremycoin]

It's surely would help the election, because the election would be more openly. But who will count the vote, what if the counter cheating while they counting the vote (so they didn't count all of the vote)

[shorena]

I just thought about what could be realized by using blockchain technology. I came across that the blockchain could help to create a secure, distributed and not manipulable election system. Every (encrypted) vote must be verified by at least a particular amount of peers before it counts like a transaction. What do you think? Is such a system conceivable?

-faschist-

Yes. Something like this should be adapted to steer the development of Bitcoin. We must break free from the ISIS coding regime.

What does a possible election system have to do with a dead faschist or with the coding abilities of an egyptian goddess?

It's surely would help the election, because the election would be more openly. But who will count the vote, what if the counter cheating while they counting the vote (so they didn't count all of the vote)

A cheat durring count could be checked after the count was made public, if everyones vote is on the blockchain thats very easy. IMHO what is more problematic is that you need to make sure than everyone gets only one vote and no one can reveal the identity of the person voting. If this would work like bitcoin, I could just create a new private key (or 1 million) to have an additional (or 1 million more) vote(s). If they are distributed in advance they might be linked to me as a person and thus all votes might get public in case of a data leak.

[shulio]

A cheat durring count could be checked after the count was made public, if everyones vote is on the blockchain thats very easy. IMHO what is more problematic is that you need to make sure than everyone gets only one vote and no one can reveal the identity of the person voting. If this would work like bitcoin, I could just create a new private key (or 1 million) to have an additional (or 1 million more) vote(s). If they are distributed in advance they might be linked to me as a person and thus all votes might get public in case of a data leak.

Any idea that could it work like the tradisional voting system where there are a fixed amount of voters depending on the requirement like atleast 17 years old to vote. Than the number of those 17 years old will be counted and a private key will be created as the same number of people for that, distributed among them to make sure everyone get one vote?

[louise123]

The idea of having voting on the blockchain isn't bad.
It's quite good actually.
The question is: Will the governments accept to use a fair method of voting without tampering with it?

[Amph]

an idea like this could be used for block generation too, against 51% i think, so the longest chain don't count anymore, and the general nodes's consensus will establish if that is legit or doublespend

it could also be used for verify real full node

[thebenjamincode]

thats a great idea! i hope that the system would not have a vote premined

[favdesu]

followmyvote.com is working on a blockchain based voting system for BitShares.

[shorena]

A cheat durring count could be checked after the count was made public, if everyones vote is on the blockchain thats very easy. IMHO what is more problematic is that you need to make sure than everyone gets only one vote and no one can reveal the identity of the person voting. If this would work like bitcoin, I could just create a new private key (or 1 million) to have an additional (or 1 million more) vote(s). If they are distributed in advance they might be linked to me as a person and thus all votes might get public in case of a data leak.

Any idea that could it work like the tradisional voting system where there are a fixed amount of voters depending on the requirement like atleast 17 years old to vote. Than the number of those 17 years old will be counted and a private key will be created as the same number of people for that, distributed among them to make sure everyone get one vote?

Its certainly possible to make only a certain set of keys valid, e.g. by signing the pubkeys. You would create a private key, go to an office, show your ID and let them sign your pubkey. That way you now have a private key that no one else has that would be eligible for voting and possibly other government contact. This would however make it possible to know in hindsight who I voted for. In order to make sure I dont go to every government office in my city and get several keys signed they need to keep track who has a signed key and which key it is. If there is a record which key belongs to which person it will some day be revealed. This would enable someone to know who voted for which party, which as the past taught us is not a good idea. Esp. if you consider that those in power have the highest chance to acquire the information.

Im not sure how this could be solved.

[bounst]

I look forward to a year of presidential elections in the United States of America, through blockchain

[turvarya]

A cheat durring count could be checked after the count was made public, if everyones vote is on the blockchain thats very easy. IMHO what is more problematic is that you need to make sure than everyone gets only one vote and no one can reveal the identity of the person voting. If this would work like bitcoin, I could just create a new private key (or 1 million) to have an additional (or 1 million more) vote(s). If they are distributed in advance they might be linked to me as a person and thus all votes might get public in case of a data leak.

Any idea that could it work like the tradisional voting system where there are a fixed amount of voters depending on the requirement like atleast 17 years old to vote. Than the number of those 17 years old will be counted and a private key will be created as the same number of people for that, distributed among them to make sure everyone get one vote?

Its certainly possible to make only a certain set of keys valid, e.g. by signing the pubkeys. You would create a private key, go to an office, show your ID and let them sign your pubkey. That way you now have a private key that no one else has that would be eligible for voting and possibly other government contact. This would however make it possible to know in hindsight who I voted for. In order to make sure I dont go to every government office in my city and get several keys signed they need to keep track who has a signed key and which key it is. If there is a record which key belongs to which person it will some day be revealed. This would enable someone to know who voted for which party, which as the past taught us is not a good idea. Esp. if you consider that those in power have the highest chance to acquire the information.

Im not sure how this could be solved.

I also thought about that, for some time.
The government could just make paper wallets, that are loaded with one vote. You go in the office show your ID, and grab a paper wallet from a jar of paper wallets and get crossed of the list. You could then send the vote from the paper wallet(which private key, was made by the government) to your self generated address.

[shorena]

A cheat durring count could be checked after the count was made public, if everyones vote is on the blockchain thats very easy. IMHO what is more problematic is that you need to make sure than everyone gets only one vote and no one can reveal the identity of the person voting. If this would work like bitcoin, I could just create a new private key (or 1 million) to have an additional (or 1 million more) vote(s). If they are distributed in advance they might be linked to me as a person and thus all votes might get public in case of a data leak.

Any idea that could it work like the tradisional voting system where there are a fixed amount of voters depending on the requirement like atleast 17 years old to vote. Than the number of those 17 years old will be counted and a private key will be created as the same number of people for that, distributed among them to make sure everyone get one vote?

Its certainly possible to make only a certain set of keys valid, e.g. by signing the pubkeys. You would create a private key, go to an office, show your ID and let them sign your pubkey. That way you now have a private key that no one else has that would be eligible for voting and possibly other government contact. This would however make it possible to know in hindsight who I voted for. In order to make sure I dont go to every government office in my city and get several keys signed they need to keep track who has a signed key and which key it is. If there is a record which key belongs to which person it will some day be revealed. This would enable someone to know who voted for which party, which as the past taught us is not a good idea. Esp. if you consider that those in power have the highest chance to acquire the information.

Im not sure how this could be solved.

I also thought about that, for some time.
The government could just make paper wallets, that are loaded with one vote. You go in the office show your ID, and grab a paper wallet from a jar of paper wallets and get crossed of the list. You could then send the vote from the paper wallet(which private key, was made by the government) to your self generated address.

Isnt that exactly what we have now or only more complicated? I get mail that on day X its time to vote. At the day of the vote I go to the office (or temp place they set up), show my ID, get a piece of paper, vote from on the paper and go home....

[Agestorzrxx]

Election System already has been realized in QORA and NXT blockchian. And it still have a lot of work to do make it realized in bitcoin blockchain. I am not sure it will be really usefull.

[turvarya]

A cheat durring count could be checked after the count was made public, if everyones vote is on the blockchain thats very easy. IMHO what is more problematic is that you need to make sure than everyone gets only one vote and no one can reveal the identity of the person voting. If this would work like bitcoin, I could just create a new private key (or 1 million) to have an additional (or 1 million more) vote(s). If they are distributed in advance they might be linked to me as a person and thus all votes might get public in case of a data leak.

Any idea that could it work like the tradisional voting system where there are a fixed amount of voters depending on the requirement like atleast 17 years old to vote. Than the number of those 17 years old will be counted and a private key will be created as the same number of people for that, distributed among them to make sure everyone get one vote?

Its certainly possible to make only a certain set of keys valid, e.g. by signing the pubkeys. You would create a private key, go to an office, show your ID and let them sign your pubkey. That way you now have a private key that no one else has that would be eligible for voting and possibly other government contact. This would however make it possible to know in hindsight who I voted for. In order to make sure I dont go to every government office in my city and get several keys signed they need to keep track who has a signed key and which key it is. If there is a record which key belongs to which person it will some day be revealed. This would enable someone to know who voted for which party, which as the past taught us is not a good idea. Esp. if you consider that those in power have the highest chance to acquire the information.

Im not sure how this could be solved.

I also thought about that, for some time.
The government could just make paper wallets, that are loaded with one vote. You go in the office show your ID, and grab a paper wallet from a jar of paper wallets and get crossed of the list. You could then send the vote from the paper wallet(which private key, was made by the government) to your self generated address.

Isnt that exactly what we have now or only more complicated? I get mail that on day X its time to vote. At the day of the vote I go to the office (or temp place they set up), show my ID, get a piece of paper, vote from on the paper and go home....

It is not the same, since you don't have the votes on a blockchain.
You put a piece of paper in a jar and the next day you see a result in the news. You don't know, if your paper in the jar is really part of the result. I often thought, "What if I made a mistake on my ballot and made my vote invalid? I would never know"

[Kakmakr]

The advantage of using the blockchain is that it's public and transparent and it cannot be changed or manipulated.
The theory and the vehicle is there, but the application in practice is very complicated.
You will have proof, that all votes entered is counted, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed. 
Good luck, with whomever wants to tackle this conundrum. <Yea, I know my spelling sucks>

[amiryaqot]

A cheat durring count could be checked after the count was made public, if everyones vote is on the blockchain thats very easy. IMHO what is more problematic is that you need to make sure than everyone gets only one vote and no one can reveal the identity of the person voting. If this would work like bitcoin, I could just create a new private key (or 1 million) to have an additional (or 1 million more) vote(s). If they are distributed in advance they might be linked to me as a person and thus all votes might get public in case of a data leak.

Any idea that could it work like the tradisional voting system where there are a fixed amount of voters depending on the requirement like atleast 17 years old to vote. Than the number of those 17 years old will be counted and a private key will be created as the same number of people for that, distributed among them to make sure everyone get one vote?

Its certainly possible to make only a certain set of keys valid, e.g. by signing the pubkeys. You would create a private key, go to an office, show your ID and let them sign your pubkey. That way you now have a private key that no one else has that would be eligible for voting and possibly other government contact. This would however make it possible to know in hindsight who I voted for. In order to make sure I dont go to every government office in my city and get several keys signed they need to keep track who has a signed key and which key it is. If there is a record which key belongs to which person it will some day be revealed. This would enable someone to know who voted for which party, which as the past taught us is not a good idea. Esp. if you consider that those in power have the highest chance to acquire the information.

Im not sure how this could be solved.

I also thought about that, for some time.
The government could just make paper wallets, that are loaded with one vote. You go in the office show your ID, and grab a paper wallet from a jar of paper wallets and get crossed of the list. You could then send the vote from the paper wallet(which private key, was made by the government) to your self generated address.

Isnt that exactly what we have now or only more complicated? I get mail that on day X its time to vote. At the day of the vote I go to the office (or temp place they set up), show my ID, get a piece of paper, vote from on the paper and go home....

It is not the same, since you don't have the votes on a blockchain.
You put a piece of paper in a jar and the next day you see a result in the news. You don't know, if your paper in the jar is really part of the result. I often thought, "What if I made a mistake on my ballot and made my vote invalid? I would never know"

that is valid question about vote status that is accepted or not and nobody knows about that with current paper voting system, if they convert the voting system to the Blockchain that will be more transparent and secure voting system ever, the result can't be manipulated by 3rd party wishes. 

[Ivanhoe]

To make things even more interesting why not let the people vote for laws instead of peoples through blockchain technology?

[shorena]

It is not the same, since you don't have the votes on a blockchain.
You put a piece of paper in a jar and the next day you see a result in the news. You don't know, if your paper in the jar is really part of the result. I often thought, "What if I made a mistake on my ballot and made my vote invalid? I would never know"

that is valid question about vote status that is accepted or not and nobody knows about that with current paper voting system, if they convert the voting system to the Blockchain that will be more transparent and secure voting system ever, the result can't be manipulated by 3rd party wishes. 

Im not sure how the voting system works in your country, but here the counting is public. You can watch them count every single vote and make sure they make no mistake. You might even distinguish your piece of paper from the others for some reason.

The advantage of using the blockchain is that it's public and transparent and it cannot be changed or manipulated.
The theory and the vehicle is there, but the application in practice is very complicated.
You will have proof, that all votes entered is counted, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed. 
Good luck, with whomever wants to tackle this conundrum. <Yea, I know my spelling sucks>

We already have (or at least I hope for you) a public and transparent system. It tedious, yes. Removing the anonymity of votes is ridiculous. It is essential to a democracy that I have no reason to be afraid of repercussions when casting my vote. This is why party membership is highly sensitive information.

[gkv9]

This will absolutely help out the election system in order to get the things going... But all we need to look for is verification of identities which might not be possible as it will be encrypted (somewhat unclear to me, so please correct me if I am wrong)...

But yes, this might surely help us to prevent the duplication of votes...