Why aren’t we using “Pret a Voter” or similar E2E system?

An early concept of end-to-end (E2E) verifiable voting systems, designed to provide both transparency and privacy in elections. One of the most well-known examples of this type of system is called Prêt à Voter (French for “Ready to Vote”), introduced by David Chaum, a pioneer in cryptographic voting.

Here’s a high-level breakdown of how it works:

Core Concepts

	1.	Paper Ballots with Encrypted Codes: Each voter receives a ballot with a list of candidates and an associated encrypted code. The code corresponds to the voter’s choice but is encrypted so that no one, not even the election officials, knows the chosen candidate directly.
	2.	Separation of Choice and Identity: After marking their choice, the voter tears off a part of the ballot, keeping their selection and a unique encrypted identifier or code. This part of the ballot can be used later to verify that their vote was correctly recorded without revealing which choice they made.
	3.	Cryptographic Verification: Once the votes are counted, a list of encrypted codes (not the candidates themselves) is published online. Voters can verify that the code associated with their vote appears on this list, proving that their vote was correctly recorded. Only the voter can link this code to their actual choice, preserving privacy.
	4.	Auditable Transparency: To detect manipulation, independent auditors can verify that the encrypted votes were properly processed through cryptographic proofs, and that the final tally matches the published codes. This process uses a type of zero-knowledge proof, which allows verifying a truth without revealing any actual private data.

Advantages

	•	Transparency and Trust: The system offers verifiable assurance that all votes are counted accurately, with tamper-evidence at every step.
	•	Privacy: Voters verify their vote was recorded without disclosing their choice to anyone else.
	•	Security: Since the system relies on cryptographic proofs, it’s difficult for an attacker to alter the outcome without detection.

Later Innovations

Other similar systems include Scantegrity (used in Takoma Park, Maryland, in 2009), which also employed a verifiable optical scan system, and Helios, an online voting system used in smaller-scale elections that combines E2E verifiability with digital-only ballots. 

 @Jeff Booth @preston @jack @LynAlden  

Let’s not kid ourselves. There will likely be very serious consequences for Bitcoiners from financial collapse. How do we best to mitigate them?
When the financial system blows up there will be extreme chaos. Supermarkets will be empty, and many people will lose their jobs and go hungry, or worse. Society will disintegrate to a significant extent. People & politicians will be running around like headless chickens. The majority will be very very scared for good reason. Rioting and social disorder will be widespread. History has shown that in this environment people crave strong leaders and drastic, draconian action by the state to hopefully save them (think the French Revolution).  It’s likely that Bitcoiners will be scapegoated, and private use and holdings in cold wallets will be outlawed. “Ah but” you say, “the government can’t seize my BTC!”
Technically they can’t, but in practice they can!
It is a reasonable assumption that western governments already know (or soon will) the contact details of the vast majority of BTC holders, their transaction history and current balances. By combining on chain analysis, data mining and AI, this is relatively easy to do.
Day 1 of the crisis: “To protect the financial system and the government” a law is passed to ban private use of BTC and holdings in cold wallets. Holders are given 30 days to put their holdings on public exchanges (where of course they can be seized). Desperate times call for desperate measures, and the penalty for non-compliance is capital punishment.
Day 31 of the crisis: 100 people are arrested for non-compliance. Fast track prosecutions ensue.
Day 40 of the crisis: 100 people are shot.
Now tell me that you are not going to comply. So in practice, the government can effectively seize your bitcoin.
 
So how do we reduce the risk of this happening?
What I mainly hear from Bitcoiners are self-congratulatory WooWoo assumptions that we will move to a Bitcoin standard and everything will be ok. But nobody explains how this traumatic transition can be made!
Where are the plans that can be put in front of panicking politicians for how to do this? If you were in power, exactly what would you do in week one? What would you do in month one, ..year one?
In short, plans need to be worked out in advance that can be publicized and sold to the population, so everyone is ready and reassured that there is a clearly structured way out of this. The crisis scenario can then look like:
Day 1 of the crisis: The BTC Financial System Reconfiguration & Recovery Plan is put into action.
Day 30 of the crisis: The plan is working and the populace is reassured…etc
 
Just my 2 Satoshis.