> Maybe it's not perfect, but (at least to me) seems like a step in a good direction.
Is it? Provided you have a working democratic state with checks and auditing, what is the problem that voting machines solve?
The level of guarantees that you have with a paper vote is hard to surpass and the inconvenience of paper vote is not that big considering how often voting occurs (even in the extreme case of Swiss style referendums).
>Provided you have a working democratic state with checks and auditing, what is the problem that voting machines solve?
It solves the problem of waiting days or weeks for a result. It solves the problem of multiple languages on a ballot. It solves the problem of visually-impaired voters accessing the voting machine, it solves the problem of incorrectly filled out voting sheets (hanging-chat).
Hell, that's just off the top of my head, and I'm sure others can contribute more.
Is a paper-vote a reference to literally marking a piece of paper, or a human counting said piece of paper? Sorry if that's a dumb question, just want to make sure I follow. It seems like this tech works with marking a piece of paper that is then read by a machine. I suppose if the paper is kept, perhaps it's nice from the point of view of the election-handling-folks to automate the counting process, but be able to audit the paper ballots?
Is it? Provided you have a working democratic state with checks and auditing, what is the problem that voting machines solve?
The level of guarantees that you have with a paper vote is hard to surpass and the inconvenience of paper vote is not that big considering how often voting occurs (even in the extreme case of Swiss style referendums).