Vitalik Buterin’s New Voting Tool Aims to Protect Privacy in Authoritarian States

Vitalik Buterin’s New Voting Tool Aims to Protect Privacy in Authoritarian States

Vitalik Buterin, co-founder of Ethereum, has unveiled a new tool designed for anonymous online voting, developed by the company Rarimo in Kyiv. Named the “Freedom Tool,” it leverages zero-knowledge proof technology to enable Russian citizens to verify their citizenship and vote online without disclosing their identities. This system aims to ensure secure and visible voting results while maintaining anonymity and resistance to censorship.

The Freedom Tool uses advanced cryptographic methods to create a secure environment for voting, particularly beneficial in authoritarian regimes where secure, anonymous communication is crucial. Buterin emphasized the importance of blockchain in facilitating such communication in these environments.

In a recent podcast, hosts Ryan Sean Adams and David Hoffman discussed the efficiency of authoritarian regimes, highlighting how countries like China and Russia invest heavily in promoting their narratives. They contrasted this with the more hands-off approach of the US. Economist Noah Smith and Buterin shared their perspectives on whether authoritarianism could outperform liberal democracies. Smith referenced Francis Fukuyama’s “The End of History” thesis, which posited that liberal democracy was the ultimate societal model. However, recent global developments have challenged this view, with the rise of China, weaknesses in the US, and the internet’s impact being central to this shift.

Smith noted that liberal democracies excel in information gathering through markets, elections, and public debate, but the internet’s centralization of data could diminish this advantage. Authoritarian states can now utilize this data to gauge public sentiment, allocate resources more effectively, and respond swiftly to unrest, as evidenced by China’s rapid policy changes following the 2022 “white paper protests.”

The internet’s propensity to spread disinformation also complicates governance in liberal democracies, where politicians must counter false narratives and focus on fundraising, detracting from effective governance. Buterin likened the information state to Thomas Hobbes’ “war of all against all,” suggesting that monopolistic control over narratives might be the only stable outcome, highlighting how authoritarian regimes could use centralized data control to strengthen their hold.

Smith and Buterin also explored counterarguments. Smith compared the internet to the printing press, which initially reduced information costs and led to more liberalism and societal fragmentation, questioning why the internet wouldn’t follow a similar path. He explained that while initial reductions in information costs benefited liberal democracies, as these costs approached zero, the spread of disinformation increased rapidly, complicating governance.

Buterin added that centralized systems often excel in extraction rather than production, potentially outcompeting more liberal systems in zero-sum conflicts. He cautioned against defining success solely by economic output, emphasizing broader impacts on human flourishing. He stressed that while blockchain might not be essential for Americans to communicate, it is crucial for individuals in authoritarian states to have secure and private conversations about their political situations.

    Newsletter | Every weekday

    Smart Central News Weekly Briefing

    Only top industry news of the week in your inbox