[EM] A secure distributed election scheme based on Bitcoin's Proof-of-Work protocol

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

robert bristow-johnson wrote:
> 
> On Jun 17, 2011, at 11:03 PM, Duane Johnson wrote:
> 
>> > I consider bitcoin, if this is all the security it has, to be 
>> garbage proposed by incompetents.
>>
>> A fairly strong reaction to a new idea. If it is truly garbage, it 
>> will come to naught. But if not, perhaps there is something to be 
>> learned.
> 
> i heard a story on NPR about it and haven't understood what it is really 
> about.  what unmet need does it address?

It meets the unmet need by certain types to do business without having 
to use money backed by the state. There are also some people who think 
all sorts of government money is worthless because the government can 
print as much as it wants; these flock to scarce minerals and 
currencies, like gold or bitcoin.

Because of the way the system is constructed, bitcoin is deflatory, so 
it's in the interests of those who joined early to get more people in. 
This may also explain some of the reaction. However, I haven't examined 
it in detail, so that might only be a small part of it.

(As for myself, state-backed is good enough for me. Besides, 
state-backed currency can be used to pay off debts, and courts can 
enforce that -- I don't think that's the case for private currency :-)

> as far as e-transfer of money, i think that public-key encryption (with 
> sufficient bits in the key) is good enough.  it's just an electronic way 
> to send a check, which is merely an order to your bank to transfer some 
> of your money to someone else.  with paper checks, the paper with your 
> signature (that can be checked) is the physical instrument.
> 
> with public-key, all they need to do is verify the signature by 
> decrypting against your public key which is on record, and they know the 
> bank order came from you, or your computer.

It's a bit more complex if you'd prefer that people can still transact 
while offline, or if you don't want a single point of failure that might 
go down (that is needed for the seller to know you're not spending the 
same money twice).

See, for instance, 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_cash#Offline_.27anonymous.27_systems