How about a machine voting system with paper fallback. You as a voter can review the paper protocol from your vote. If there is distrust, the justice system can review the paper trail as well.

▲

rwmj 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don't understand the reason for electronic voting. The UK manages to tally up paper votes overnight, even from far-flung Scottish islands. Electronic voting is literally solving a problem that nobody has.

▲

85392_school 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The UK is the world's 22nd most populated and 78th largest country.

	▲	rwmj 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		UK population density (people/sq km) is 289 and Switzerland's is 228, so not very different. Plus Switzerland is fully connected, there are no remote islands. [1] https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by...
	▲	themafia 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		So more populated countries have more potential poll workers to choose from. Isn't this a linear relationship? What does size have to do with anything?

▲

1718627440 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> If there is distrust, the justice system can review the paper trail as well.

There is always, so you would just always count the ballots.

▲

themafia 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

What is the rush to tally the ballots? Do we need an _instant_ count? Isn't that actually a negative attribute as far as security is concerned?

The distance between the election and the taking of the office is often months. I just don't understand why electronics need to be involved at all in this system.

	▲	brainwad an hour ago \| parent [-]
		FWIW Swiss elections are counted in at most 6 hours, usually quicker except for big cities. If your system takes longer than that, it's a bad system. Also it's not just elections to offices, but also votes on yes/no propositions, which can take effect more or less immediately.