On 11/15/2016 00:55, Joel Wirāmu Pauling wrote:
So yes, back to my original point. A Civic's blockchain, one that does not rely on the integrity (or rather is resilient to) the system it runs on, or the security of the transmission media ; as a platform for use in civic's - needs to exist first.
Combining two systems entirely separate in concept, implementation, and space increases the probability of a correct answer. Three would be better. Using the electronic system as a supplement to the traditional one could be good as long as it does not compromise the virtues of the old system. The blockchain starts after the votes are entered. Two physically separate systems composed of entirely different CPUs and peripherals at the voting place would be good. You still haven't addressed the problems of privacy while casting the vote. I think that your concepts for the technical parts of the system are good. You haven't addressed some serious problems where your system can be subverted. Suggesting weekly votes is a very bad idea. Search science fiction, for instance, to see very plausible predictions of voter burnout. I think this is no longer a computer systems discussion. Geoff Steckel
