Here the other two stooges show up to voice their concerns:
https://i.imgur.com/nGApNMA.pnghttps://i.imgur.com/9WII8ls.pngHelios is apparently the best we have, even though they both admit not having fully audited it
and with statements like below, clearly a full understanding of the new system hasn't been reached
"Perhaps someone can figure out how people voted based on block chain analysis"..
are you fucking kidding me...Is this really coming from a core dev?
Not perhaps. Absolutely they can.
That is the whole point.. A side effect of transferring upon an open ledger. It's called transparency.
The "issue" of using the blockchain in an efficient manner is a moot one. Not even worth the time to address since it's common knowledge greg maxwell beleives anything beyond BTC transactions on bitcoin is making a mockery of the blockchain (despite the fact counterparty transactions
are slightly tweaked bitcoin transactions like colored coins) Newsflash: the
current blockchain construct is inefficient Proof-of-work is inefficient. We do not need efficiency in a voting protocol. We need security, transparency and verifiability.
next the "issue" of vote selling is a fraudulent point raised by the pair. They know better so it's upsetting they would try to maintain otherwise. Helios credentials could be easily sold before
1 regardless of the fact it's a "Secret ballot"and if not credentials outright, this is well known.
1In Helios as well, if the credentials
of a voter have been leaked, they can be used to cast a vote
on voter’s behalf.
Helios 2.0 [2], [3]: This system is designed for lowcoercion
elections. It makes a few efforts to resist potential
coercion, for example by keeping secret from voters the
randoms in their ballots, but these efforts are easily defeated.
On the positive side, Helios 2.0 enjoys individual and
universal verifiability (but not eligibility verifiability)
http://www.gurchetan.com/papers/caveatcoercitor.pdf single votes could be brought and independently verified by the purchaser- shoulder surfing, screensharing, attestation, e.g SSL proofs. Bad actors will be bad actors. They both are being intentionally deceptive bringing this argument up. The mining-blacklisting article is almost as bad. vote transactions don't just get rejected and locked up into the ether.
"Most electronic voting schemes aim at providing verifiability: voters should trust the result without having to rely on some authorities. Actually, even a prominent voting system like Helios cannot fully achieve verifiability since a dishonest bulletin board may add ballots. This problem is called ballot stuffing."
"We further provide simple and natural criteria that imply weak verifiability. As an application of these criteria, we formally prove the latest variant of Helios by Bernhard, Pereira and Warinschi weakly verifiable"
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-319-11212-1_19 The bitcoin based system does not allow Ballot stuffing. It achieves extremely strong verifiability but they did not mention that in their criticism
Shameful deceptive display from these core devs. These consider themselves the blockchain police. They HATE any "Altcoin" and only view Bitcoin and Sidechains (The two projects they are invested in) as having potential. This is common knowledge to a passive observer who's followed drama from the past few years and can see where things are going. Luke-Jr and Gmaxwell are Blockstream co-founders (funded by $21 million wall st dollars)
luke-jr is the one who abused his power to blacklist mastercoin, counterparty,Luckybit, satoshidice, satosihibones and betcoin by default on some linux distributions
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2pfgjg/exposed_lukejr_plans_on_forcing_blacklists_on_all/ and same guy who HATES spam on the bitcoin network yet abused his own pool to embed prayers inside the blockchain, without consulting it's users and abused his pool to kill other altcoins by 51% attack.
These are the same guys who tried (And succeeded for a while) in crippling the OP_RETURN limit then criticizing workarounds.
It's clear they view anything not pure Bitcoin as a currency or Sidechains "For the magic" as distractions. They want to kill any project which does what their currently vaporware Blockstream venture does as it harms their bottom line and do not have a problem distorting truths in order to serve their own interests.
