Centralized system vs. decentralized system

“Important is not who is voting. It’s important who counts the votes. ” It is already a popular, four-year-old ark-known syntax that propagates a cynical attitude instead of a political perspective. The vote is usually 30-40-50%, which reflects the opinion of the possible voters – my vote does not matter anyway. In a corrupt state, vote counts proportionally less than certain games.

If the blockchain can be very transparent, as described, it can also be very opaque. We see this system for coins with higher anonymity, such as zcash or monero. The bitcoin blockchain has been retrieved and modified to provide a higher level of anonymity to users. A degree of maximum anonymity also means that these coins can be used predominantly in black markets (drugs, money laundering, terrorism). However, implemented in the citizen voting system, a block anchor with high anonymity can be very precious. Read more.

Cryptomonads mechanism

Here’s what the cryptomonads chips’ arrangement looks like, and how it can be deployed to make incorruptible electronic voting possible.  The Bitcoin protocol prescribes a public key, alphanumeric and pseudo-anonymous, which reads as follows:

15UVYs6LbcMmCaY8ruZH7c8EmNEvGXPTdW

The population register could replace this free password with the right to vote already in the state database. It could look like this: Jon Doe, major and with the right to vote.

The free password is associated with a private password, known only by the right user of the account. Every citizen receives the automatic public password and automatically generated private password but created by an algorithm that makes it secret on the network.

However, what happens to computer illiteracy, that is, those people who do not know how to use a device? (older adults, rural people, etc.). They will have a public password and a private password, but they may not be able to use it. Some of them will still vote traditionally; others will abstain from voting altogether. Typically, the most significant frictions occur when the carbon and electronic world meet. Can they use their public password and private malicious account to falsify their vote? Will they be able to vote once in a traditional and once in an electronic way? No, because the polling stations will pass an electronic register to their vote, that is, they will validate a vote in the name of the free password upon signing up. In this way, the issue of “tourists” voters, which go from one jurisdiction to another voting more than once, is solved.

The critical part of making electronic voting possible is a digital signature. The signature is different for each blockchain transaction and has the following components:

The user has entered a public password.

The user has accessed the account with a private password.

The user made a transaction at a specific time of day (with time stamp) – whether it is a value transaction or “user voted” information.

Visit this website: https://www.wired.com/2011/11/mf-bitcoin/

Depending on these data, a unique digital signature is generated. It cannot be duplicated. In other words, anyone can see the name to catalog it as valid, but the data that compose it are not necessarily public – identity, private password, and the operation itself. Yes, some data may be public, such as the open password, that is, there might be a registry to see if the multinational director X voted, but you cannot know his private password and his vote is not public. Just that X voted and his vote is valid is public.

The nodes validate this digital signature. The bitcoin blockchain nodes provide network processing power. Devices can be subscribed to the network by downloading the blockchain and periodically updating it. The information is therefore kept on several machines, communicating to each other that they have validated the digital signature, that information network related to the network operations.

The bitcoin network is supported by tens of thousands of devices that offer processing power. In the same way, on the day of voting, the network can be protected by citizens’ devices, which download the blockchain on a device and allow it to update itself periodically. Higher processing power can only attack it, more than the existing one in the network. Let’s assume the government of a country wants to kick the vote in another country. It has to put more processing power into the network than the existing one, and the nodes thus created invalidate the citizens’ electronic vote. In theory, it is not impossible, but practically a great power should spend far more than the annual gross domestic product to give a blow to voting in another country.

If you are looking for an innovative method to make more money with cryptocurrencies, you can use a bot, such as the Bitcoin Trader which you can learn more by reading this Bitcoin Trader review. The bot is recommended as a valid option that replaces continuous mining. It can also be used when voting. It is, therefore, less costly to give a coup when there is no electronic vote unless it is implemented. A crucial aspect, however, is the vote itself, which must be 100% anonymous. In the bitcoin network, the transmitted information would be the amount of money traded, which on the blockchain is public. A sent 5btc to B = A voted for Z.  Most people want this information to be private.

If in the bitcoin blocks this information, the traded amount (vote cast) is public, other crypto money has changed the open-source protocol to be private (zcash and monero are just two of the coins that do not record this information on the block). Therefore, the voting block can adopt features from such cryptomonads. Records that person A recorded the electronic vote, also records that person A voted with a particular party, but the two information is not associated with each other.

Finally, the computerized protocol (incorruptible because it is supported by nodes and guaranteed by a verifiable open-source protocol) counts the votes, a much safer move than if a handful of representatives from several parties spend the night scoring the ballot papers. There is no more fatigue, inattention, corruption, or lack of interest, as these are not software features.

Benefits

You can vote at home. Electronic voting can take only a minute and can be done from the comfort of your home. Votes are counted correctly by the protocol, without interference from malicious actors or bugs. The process of counting votes can be less costly for the public budget after creating and implementing a contract for which we already have resources, thanks to the willingness of developers who have already built open-source systems for different cryptomonads.

Disadvantages

Informal illiteracy that implies that friction between analog voting and digital electronic voting has to be reduced. The lack of interest among the population to impose such a system (a general apathy of the citizens). The fact that the governors have no interest in creating an ethical voting framework. No, electronic voting cannot be implemented in a day. However, it can indeed work on it. This is not the first time that developers discuss this issue, either under the idea of ​​creating smart contracts, as we have seen in The DAO, which is based on voting chips or other formulas that can be used as parts in this system. Working on such a system is vital as well as seeing what the future of bitcoin brings.

The more time Satoshi loses more of his market manipulation power, and the fact that he missed the best opportunity in 2013 to liquidate its assets tells a lot about how much trust he has in the ecosystem.