https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/_en, This is the initiative I am talking about. You have to prove you are an EU citizen and then you can sign for the initiatives you want and if a million signatures are reaching within a year then it must be brought to the EU commission.

So if citizens of EU member states can sign online, why can’t they vote online for elections or referendums? If possible, this would decrease the need and power of representative democracy and move closer to direct democracy, which I argue is a good thing

  • Björn Tantau@swg-empire.de
    36·
    3 days ago

    Because signing a petition isn’t voting. First and foremost voting should be anonymous. Secondly voting should be secret. Combine these with online voting from an unsecured location where your spouse could coerce you into voting for their candidate and it becomes a security nightmare.

    On top of that voting should be transparent. With simple paper ballots any child, idiot and elderly person, every citizen can understand how it works. YOU can keep an eye on the whole process to make sure everything is counted and reported correctly. This isn’t a theoretical possibility. People actually do that. And that way irregularities do get spotted.

    • TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip
      6·
      3 days ago

      You could summarize the whole transparency thing into just one word: trust. As long as people trust that everything is fine, the society can continue to function. When people loose trust, everything falls apart.

      If you can convince millions of people that the voting system works and is fair, you can have a democratic society. If not, you might want to look into alternatives such as totalitarian dictatorship, monarchy or even post apocalyptic absolute chaos.

    • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
      41·
      3 days ago

      child

      Obviously babies cant vote but i find it weird how zionist we are about a magic age number to mark full maturity.

      We allow demented elders to become president so why not also lets kids vote, its their future.

    • Deceptichum@quokk.auEnglish
      21·
      3 days ago

      Combine these with online voting from an unsecured location where your spouse could coerce you into voting for their candidate and it becomes a security nightmare.

      Uh like postal voting from home? This should not be a serious concern.

      • Enoril@jlai.lu
        7·
        3 days ago

        It is still a valid concern here and it’s why we still vote physically.

        We also put our paper choice in a envelope, operation done from a one person polling booth. People in the voting room make sure everyone, including couples, are not watching or forcing a choice to another.

        The vote is always done the Sunday to give the time for the most people to go voting (a lot of enterprises and shops are closed the Sunday). And if you work, your boss can’t block you to leave few hours for voting.

  • iii@mander.xyzEnglish
    31·
    3 days ago

    Voting from home makes voting under duress easier, which is a thing I’d argue that should be avoided.

      • Otter@lemmy.caEnglish
        12·
        3 days ago

        I’d also like to link to this Tom Scott video

        Why Electronic Voting Is Still A Bad Idea: https://youtube.com/watch?v=LkH2r-sNjQs

        The strongest argument for me: trust

        Even with our paper ballots, hand counting, and many checks along the way, people now have doubts about the accuracy of the results. No matter how good the tech is, it will be impossible to convince the general public that the online votes are accurate.

        Also this classic xkcd

        https://xkcd.com/2030/

      • Otter@lemmy.caEnglish
        4·
        3 days ago

        As for voting under duress, it’s also a concern with mail in ballots and voting by phone. It can be worse with online in the same way that scams are easier online.

        I know someone who voted by phone this recent election in my home province, and they were eligible to do so because of sudden health issues. The phone call included multiple people who verified their information, took down the vote, and then verified the vote. I imagine something would get flagged if there was any discrepancy.

    • snooggums@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      3 days ago

      Mail in voting…

      Which works well and should be kept, but it has similar issues with coercion.

      Electronic being traceable.tl the individual voters at scale is the bigger issue .

  • themoonisacheese@sh.itjust.works
    7·
    3 days ago

    Because the entire idea of online voting is terrible and we should never ever ever do it except when it’s to name a boat. This is coming from a dev and sysadmin, we are the people who know and we are telling you it’s a terrible idea.

  • Ziggurat@sh.itjust.works
    5·
    3 days ago

    While I love the theoretical idea of direct democracy, the EU is supposed to address high level issue with generic directive.

    So complex laws on complex topics. Do you know the details of directives like reach? (and typical lemmy audience has more chance to understand REACH over finance) Do you know the details about every chemical substance allowed/banned? Even good faith politicians end up believing lobbyists, imagine a regural person without a team of assistant

    Direct democracy is great, but the EU is a too generic level for it to work

  • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    2·
    3 days ago

    Signing a petition is public, who you cast your vote for is private.

    If there were any doubts on the signatures, officials can contact the people who signed and verify that they did sign. How do you verify a secret vote without ruining the secrecy?

    I mean you can have online voting if you cast a ballot thats public, and it’d be verifiable, but then we go back to the 1800s in the US where threatening voters is a thing.

    You have 3 elements:

    1: Internet voting

    2: Secrecy

    3: Verifiable

    Pick 2.