>If your grandma accidentally loses her private voting keys to hackers, do we just roll over and let the hackers vote as your grandma? Obviously not.
It's not obvious to me why not. It's a trade-off. You put the responsibility on the user to keep their keys but you save a lot by not spending anything on solving fake or real issues like this.
In this case if you want assurances like this you can trust a third party that handles that stuff for you.
We do things according to what our goals is. Tinkering around technically just for the sake of it provides no value on its own.
In this case, someone losing their voting ability because of the system on a regular basis is not acceptable. That's the obvious why not. We want to make a system to count the people's votes. If it bars a voter from casting their vote, it's a failure.
You’ll note that most people purchase things with credit cards and checks. Trying to buy your daily latte with a gold coin will get you some very strange looks and a manager trying to figure out what to do.
Things like that are more closely associated with heist movies (or their more mundane analogue, "used notes", with run-of-the-mill crime) than legitimate commerce.
It's not obvious to me why not. It's a trade-off. You put the responsibility on the user to keep their keys but you save a lot by not spending anything on solving fake or real issues like this.
In this case if you want assurances like this you can trust a third party that handles that stuff for you.