this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2025
146 points (100.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

42195 readers
784 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 38 points 4 days ago (8 children)

All votes really need a numbered receipt, like a tracking number, that shows what that number voted for, and then posted publicly. This way if you think you're vote was changed you can go and look online to see if it matches how you voted...but doubt this would ever be put in place.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I don't think that's a good idea at all. Leaks happen all the time and everyone knows that a lot of those machines are compromised. If republicans know exactly who voted for who, that could be an Alligator Auschwitz trip for certain people.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

The problem is, that it's either a system with checks or you get a system with no checks and potential fraud.

This would still be anonymous, you vote, it prints out a ticket number just for you not assigned to anyone but the votes that have been cast. You walk out of the voting booth with a ticket that has a number assigned to the votes nothing more.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I was thinking if it's just a ballot that has a number but it's not attached to your name. I.e. if the person handing out the ballots gives you a random one and you're the only one who knows your own number. I've never used electric voting machines but maybe a randomly generated number that you can know but nobody else would know?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago

The problem with any kind of system like this is that if you can verify your own vote, then someone else could always force you to show them that verification.

Relevant XKCD

[–] [email protected] 20 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

That's illegal in most places. Votes are anonymous specifically on purpose. Numerous people have been threatened to vote certain ways in the past all over the world. If there is no record of you specifically voting a specific choice, you can't be forced to vote a specific way. And you can't be targeted after the fact for that vote.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 days ago (7 children)

Also because it's an effective way to prove you voted a certain way to a vote buyer.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 days ago (1 children)

That is a bad idea because now someone else can also check how you've voted. I.e. you can be coerced or threatened to vote a certain way. The current system is anonymous. You can vote X but say you voted Y and nobody can prove different.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago (2 children)

The idea of it being numbered is that you are given your number when you vote to check against later, but nobody else is given that number so they can't tie the vote to you.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 days ago (19 children)

Often times the people this would hurt most would be the spouses of abusive individuals. They could force the receipt, and would be able to confirm their victim voted the way they were told.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 4 days ago (2 children)

But you can be coerced to give up that number. People can buy your vote and you can give them your number as proof. That's a huuuuge problem. You should not be able to prove (to someone else) how you voted. Ever.

What you need is some kind of systeem that allows you to verify your vote, but which is useless to someone else. It's probably possible. But your idea isn't it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

Transparent urn and public counting ?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 days ago (4 children)

This is the exact use-case for a blockchain, a public immutable ledger where you can validate your vote, but nobody can tie it back to you.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

the point of anonymous voting is coercion. if you can validate your vote outside of a safe polling place then someone else is able to validate how you voted and force you to vote a particular way

voting systems you need to be able to validate that your vote is submitted as you wanted (imo only paper based voting allows for this), and then that the system for counting the votes is inviolable (that’s where scrutineers come in)… again, imo that’s not something you can do electronically - or at least practically

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Can't we be coerced to get in our car, drive to a polling place, and vote for a particular candidate? Blackmail, other threats, or financial incentives etc, I'm not sure why a physical polling place is safer than being able to vote anonymously

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

No matter who threatens you, they can't see what's on the paper ballot you put in a box. There's people at the polling station that ensure that.

If there's any way of tracking your vote, someone could threaten you, force you to vote a certain way, then force you to show the verification afterwards.

The safest way to ensure everyone gets a fair vote is paper ballots in a box.

I know the US uses a lot of mail-in voting, and that you generally deem it to be secure. I also understand that the US is a far less densely populated country than my own, which makes mail-in voting more necessary. However, we don't have that in my country, and the reason I'm glad for it is exactly this: There's no truly effective way to prevent anyone from forcing someone else to mail in a specific vote.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

I appreciate you sharing your insight and knowledge, honestly, I'm grateful

I'm stubborn and hard to convince, is what i meant

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

In your home, someone could force themselves in, force you to vote for someone and verify you did so.

With anonymous voting at a polling place, sure someone could force you to go there, but since the vote itself is anonymous (and there's people around to check it is), they would never be able to verify that you indeed voted X or Y way. It's also why most countries ban taking pictures of your vote; no proving to anyone how you voted!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Your examples are still the same. Polling places which require you to fill out your ballot by hand verify that you voted for someone because you can be watched or recorded as you were filling it out.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic. I literally just don't see the difference.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

because you can be watched or recorded as you were filling it out

You expressly can't do this. This is why there's a voting booth and observers who make sure you're alone in the booth. And after you fill out the ballot, it gets folded inward and placed in a box that is closed off until election day is over. There's no way to verify who you voted for, as your name isn't on the ballot.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

worth noting here that this is verification that your vote was submitted as you want it. from here, the system protects the integrity of the vote. interested parties (usually the major political parties) can organise scrutineers to follow the boxes from polling places to counting centres to ensure the boxes aren’t tampered with (along with seals and other physical security features). from there, people - multiple per vote - read and tally the big pile of votes… scrutineers here validate that the count is being conducted correctly (again, these are usually from any major party so anyone with something to gain or loose all agree on every single ballot that is counted). generally, if scrutineers disagree about a ballot it gets held for further processing of some kind

in these systems, it ensures integrity because the individual can ensure their vote is for sure cast how they want, and then anyone is able to validate the integrity of the count and process itself. there’s no place where this system can be measurably subverted (small scale fraud is pretty rare because it’s really not worth doing. large scale fraud is basically impossible to achieve without completely subverting an entire step in the process across the entire country, which is absolutely going to be noticed)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

You're forgetting about the traffic analysis and key distribution problems

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

No different than how it's recorded today. We can improve from there but it's not worse with the upside of a public ledger.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Under your system republicans would just send everyone who voted democrat to death camps.

At least with a secret ballot they can only do that to everyone they think voted against them.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Under this system, the votes are tied to a randomized number, not to a person. They wouldn't know.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I don't think that's how a technofascist surveillance state works. They would know.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)