We should also remember in all of this no purely electronic voting scheme, without the most asinine, if not draconian, is-a-person identity methods, cannot prevent the *selling* of votes. Essentially, if the right to vote is defined by an electronic credential, or, more properly a zero-knowledge proof-of-knowledge of an electronic credential, that credential is instantly fungible -- and transferrable.
Of course, that's what we want in the long run, I suppose: demonopololized force markets. That is, people who buy and sell their votes are called "shareholders", right? To mix a paraphrase like a dead horse, in the long run, l' etat c'est merde. Cheers, RAH Parlez vous franglais? -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
