Was YOUR vote counted? (feat. homomorphic encryption) - Numberphile

Why HN readers recommended it

HN commenters point to it in election-security threads as an accessible explainer of how a vote can be verifiable but not sellable.

This is a summary from the source dataset, not an endorsement by Hacker News or the video creator.

Video & recommendation details

Creator / channel

Numberphile

Topic

verifiable voting

Format

explainer

Level

general

HN recommenders in dataset

5

HN mentions in dataset

10

Recommendation years in dataset

2016–2024

These counts and years describe the included Hacker News records; they are not YouTube views or the video’s publication date.

From the original HN conversations

Excerpts from the recorded comments. Follow each source for the full comment and surrounding discussion.

• Andrew Appel (CS Prof. at Princeton) also gave a very good talk earlier this year about the problems of electronic voting systems. [LINK] edit: Also, Ron Rivest was recently on Numberphile, where he talked about using homomorphic encryption to enable end-to-end verifiable voting. [VIDEO]

• I find Rivest's video( [VIDEO] ) on homomorphic encryption as voting mechanism quite interesting. It looks more secure than pen and paper. All user get a receipt which they can verify is same during vote counting. They themselves can vote count using all others receipt. …

• The mechanism for voter verification is based on homomorphic encryption. Numberphile made a video on this topic recently, with a few basic explainers: [VIDEO]