几乎不需要人工参与，整个过程可以公开运行（只读）以获得透明度。 选民 ID 受到保护，因为只有哈希值和选择是公开的，因此观察者可以检查人口数量、计票等。 也许，整个事情可以自动化，所以很少 需要人类的参与。
可以编写代码让您只能投票一次， 例如，如果投票 = False，则允许投票 = True
投票可以记录为 2（或更多）字节，允许 4 个半字节用于 4 个选择，等等。
您不能投票两次，因为一旦您的投票针对您的个人哈希进行了登记，一次你投票了，就无法更改。
您的识别哈希必须与集中保存的哈希相匹配才能进行投票。
我只是提供一个简单的框架，说明如何将系统组合在一起，看起来相当健壮。
I've seen a lot of evidence of vote fraud in the US 2020 election, that is now the subject of Federal and State lawsuits (see: Hammer / Scorecard / Dominion) [NY Post][1]
[More Links][2]
I wondered how I might put together a decent voting system. It really doesn't seem that difficult.
I present the following skeleton outline of such a system.
A Central Govt could issue Hashes of a people's Dob + Name plus a random 4 digit. (or other identifying information)
This database is held centrally by Govt, (possibly blockchain)
The hash of this information is sent to the voter via post, email or SMS.
Voter then takes this to the polling station,
If the hash presented match a centrally recorded hash, # your vote choice is recorded against your centrally held Hash.
Such a system could form the basis of a pretty decent voting mechanism.
If a Hash is 100 Characters in length, and there are 30 million voters (in the UK) that would mean a database of around 3Gb.
The whole thing could be run on a very small platform.
Very little human involvement is needed and the whole thing could be run in the open (read only) for transparency. Voter ID is protected because only hashes and the choice are publically available, so observers can check population numbers, tally votes etc. Possibly, the entire thing could be automated, so little human involvement is needed.
The code could be written so you can only vote once, eg if Vote = False then Vote Allowed = True
The vote could be recorded as 2 (or more) Bytes allowing 4 nibbles for 4 choices etc etc etc.
You can't vote twice because once your vote is registered against your personal hash, once you vote, it can't be altered can't be altered.
Your identifying hash must match a centrally held hash to be allowed to vote.
I'm only presenting a bare bones skeleton outline of how a system might be put together that seems reasonably robust.
The problem is that just about any system you can create can be gamed, and good luck trying to figure out how it can be gamed before hand. Of course, the other problem is that us "Type A" personalities attach far too much weight to something that is essentially meaningless, so you get people exerting vast amounts of time and effort to maximizing their rep or minimizing somebody else's.
(And because I'm a big hypocrite but am trying not to be, I'll make this CW)
There is a whole lot in the literature on voting systems, and a good bit of game theory can be applied. The issue that's difficult is that it's inherently probabilistic; you pick certain patterns as indicating probable fraud, and detect or exclude them; by doing so, you also exclude the possibility that someone is voting that way for innocent, or at least non-fraudulent reasons.
Consider, eg, someone who reads my deathless prose, develops an instant man-crush on me, and goes through all my answers voting each one up. I've got more than 30 answers so it would take a few days. Now, by assumption, this isn't my reputation-whoring sock-puppet, it's a person who for their own reasons, however unwise, has devoting all their voting to me for days at a time.
Is this fraud? No, but it would be detected as, and probably treated as, fraud.
发布评论
评论（3）
我在美国 2020 年大选中看到了很多投票欺诈的证据，这现在是联邦和州诉讼的主题（参见：Hammer / Scorecard / Dominion）
[纽约邮报][1]
[更多链接][2]
我想知道如何建立一个像样的投票系统。
看起来确实没那么难。
我提出了这样一个系统的以下框架。
中央政府可以发布人民的出生地+姓名的哈希值
加上随机的 4 位数字。 （或其他识别信息）
该数据库由政府集中保存，（可能是区块链）
该信息的哈希值通过邮寄、电子邮件或短信发送给选民。
然后选民将其带到投票站，
如果提供的哈希值与集中记录的哈希值匹配，#
您的投票选择将根据您集中持有的哈希进行记录。
这样的系统可以构成相当不错的投票机制的基础。
如果哈希长度为 100 个字符，并且有 3000 万选民（在英国），则意味着数据库大小约为 3Gb。
整个事情可以在一个非常小的平台上运行。
几乎不需要人工参与，整个过程可以公开运行（只读）以获得透明度。
选民 ID 受到保护，因为只有哈希值和选择是公开的，因此观察者可以检查人口数量、计票等。
也许，整个事情可以自动化，所以很少
需要人类的参与。
可以编写代码让您只能投票一次，
例如，如果投票 = False，则允许投票 = True
投票可以记录为 2（或更多）字节，允许 4 个半字节用于 4 个选择，等等。
您不能投票两次，因为一旦您的投票针对您的个人哈希进行了登记，一次你投票了，就无法更改。
您的识别哈希必须与集中保存的哈希相匹配才能进行投票。
我只是提供一个简单的框架，说明如何将系统组合在一起，看起来相当健壮。
I've seen a lot of evidence of vote fraud in the US 2020 election, that is now the subject of Federal and State lawsuits (see: Hammer / Scorecard / Dominion)
[NY Post][1]
[More Links][2]
I wondered how I might put together a decent voting system.
It really doesn't seem that difficult.
I present the following skeleton outline of such a system.
A Central Govt could issue Hashes of a people's Dob + Name
plus a random 4 digit. (or other identifying information)
This database is held centrally by Govt, (possibly blockchain)
The hash of this information is sent to the voter via post, email or SMS.
Voter then takes this to the polling station,
If the hash presented match a centrally recorded hash, #
your vote choice is recorded against your centrally held Hash.
Such a system could form the basis of a pretty decent voting mechanism.
If a Hash is 100 Characters in length, and there are 30 million voters (in the UK) that would mean a database of around 3Gb.
The whole thing could be run on a very small platform.
Very little human involvement is needed and the whole thing could be run in the open (read only) for transparency.
Voter ID is protected because only hashes and the choice are publically available, so observers can check population numbers, tally votes etc.
Possibly, the entire thing could be automated, so little
human involvement is needed.
The code could be written so you can only vote once,
eg if Vote = False then Vote Allowed = True
The vote could be recorded as 2 (or more) Bytes allowing 4 nibbles for 4 choices etc etc etc.
You can't vote twice because once your vote is registered against your personal hash, once you vote, it can't be altered can't be altered.
Your identifying hash must match a centrally held hash to be allowed to vote.
I'm only presenting a bare bones skeleton outline of how a system might be put together that seems reasonably robust.
问题是，几乎任何你能创建的系统都可以被玩弄，祝你好运，尝试事先弄清楚如何玩弄它。 当然，另一个问题是，我们“A型”性格的人过于重视本质上毫无意义的事情，因此人们会花费大量的时间和精力来最大化自己的声誉或最小化别人的声誉。
（因为我是个大伪君子，但我尽量不这么做，所以我会制作这个 CW）
The problem is that just about any system you can create can be gamed, and good luck trying to figure out how it can be gamed before hand. Of course, the other problem is that us "Type A" personalities attach far too much weight to something that is essentially meaningless, so you get people exerting vast amounts of time and effort to maximizing their rep or minimizing somebody else's.
(And because I'm a big hypocrite but am trying not to be, I'll make this CW)
关于投票系统的文献有很多，并且可以应用大量博弈论。 困难的问题在于它本质上是概率性的。 您选择某些模式来表明可能欺诈，并检测或排除它们； 通过这样做，您还可以排除某人出于无辜或至少非欺诈原因而进行投票的可能性。
例如，考虑一下有人读了我不朽的散文，立即对我产生了一种男人的迷恋，并浏览了我所有的答案，对每一个都进行了投票。 我收到了 30 多个答案，所以需要几天时间。 现在，根据假设，这不是我的声誉嫖客傀儡，而是一个出于自己的原因（无论多么不明智）连续几天将所有选票投给我的人。
这是欺诈吗？ 不会，但它会被检测为欺诈，并且可能被视为欺诈。
There is a whole lot in the literature on voting systems, and a good bit of game theory can be applied. The issue that's difficult is that it's inherently probabilistic; you pick certain patterns as indicating probable fraud, and detect or exclude them; by doing so, you also exclude the possibility that someone is voting that way for innocent, or at least non-fraudulent reasons.
Consider, eg, someone who reads my deathless prose, develops an instant man-crush on me, and goes through all my answers voting each one up. I've got more than 30 answers so it would take a few days. Now, by assumption, this isn't my reputation-whoring sock-puppet, it's a person who for their own reasons, however unwise, has devoting all their voting to me for days at a time.
Is this fraud? No, but it would be detected as, and probably treated as, fraud.