On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Eugen Leitl <[email protected]> wrote: > > Paper is self-documenting. It creates its own documentation trail. > Paper is offline, so it can't be scrambled. Paper is distributed > over multiple independant physically securable compartments. > People understand sealed urns, counting, locks, guards. > Paper can be trusted to be fully inspectable to uninstrumented humans. > Paper can be counted independently by mutually distrusting observers. > Paper is physical, and is subject to the usual safety protocols. > People understand protocols and processes for physical objects. >
All the above could be true ... but the problem in most developing countries is the word "people" -- who have greater involvement in a paper based process ... there are enough documented rigged elections around -- in most cases the people are more easy to corrupt than the system itself (paper or electronic). for e.g. -- this sentence ... > Paper can be trusted to be fully inspectable to uninstrumented humans. ... is the very reason paper ballot elections are so easy to rig in technology and democratic process deficient regions where many such incidents take place. If you have a well audit sealed electronic voting box scenario -- it would be significantly more difficult to rig it using traditional means -- at least until the ones attempting to fix an election have caught up with it technologically.
