Brought to you by the Department of Erasing History.

  • Dark Arc
    link
    fedilink
    English
    137 months ago

    Yeah, it’s actually … a bit creepy.

    Federated voting in general seems like it could use some rethinking to enable private voting but also to protect against vote manipulation. Right now the fediverse is arguably incredibly vulnerable to vote manipulation campaigns.

    • @fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      117 months ago

      Open (and distributed) and private are two very difficult things to intermingle. You can mitigate some issues, but at the end of the day the two ideas have to butt against each other.

        • capital
          link
          fedilink
          English
          27 months ago

          What aspect of the points mentioned in the thread do you feel are addressed by blockchain?

          • @laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Openly distributed while being private(-ish; I know blockchains aren’t truly private but it could at least obfuscate it adequately against casual or semi serious attempts to identify someone)

            I’ll admit I’m no expert or even particularly well versed in blockchain technologies, but my (limited) understanding of them suggests this might actually be the kind of thing it’s good at (as opposed to how it could seemingly do anything a few years ago and everyone was trying to shoehorn a blockchain into their products)

            And to underline part of my comment, I did say “I wonder if…” rather than asserting that it would work or even that I bet it would work

            • capital
              link
              fedilink
              English
              27 months ago

              Fedi technologies are already distributed. That’s literally what federation is about.

              Blockchain isn’t private by default although some have gone that direction. Bitcoin, for example, is pseudonymous - all transactions are public to the world though no tx is tied to an identity on chain.

              Any privacy features you’re imagining can be built for a blockchain solution to this problem could be built into a “normal”, web 2.0, federated solution that would be far less expensive to run, resource-wise.

              It’s almost always the case that when someone comes up with blockchain as the solution to some problem, they mean distributed or maybe self-hosted. Neither of which requires a blockchain.

              Check out videos involving crypto on the Cartoon Avatar’s youtube channel such as this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xq721IAqBo&t.

            • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘
              link
              fedilink
              English
              17 months ago

              Fair point. Blockchain might be the quickest to implement just because the infrastructure is already established, even if it’s not trivial. Not sure, though.

    • r3df0x ✡️✝☪️A
      link
      fedilink
      English
      17 months ago

      I was wondering about this. If they didn’t keep track of who is voting, manipulation would be easier then it already is. The problem is that rogue instance admins could make votes public.

      • Dark Arc
        link
        fedilink
        English
        17 months ago

        One possible answer is to allow anyone to see votes categorized by instance, so you know where they’re originating from.

        Small/single user instances could be aggregated together/anonymized or maybe that’s just the price you pay for having a single user instance.