It's a typical case of a problem that we really think could be fixed by technology, but you're only adding or changing technology layers and the end result doesn't change, because it's not a technological problem, but a human one.
People can be confident in paper votes because they can understand how to audit the result, and who does it.
The best e-voting software in the world can provide that level of trust only to some engineers who know the code, and only if they can audit all the systems where the software is deployed.
It's like passwords, it can't work if part of the population has no clue why it's needed or how it works. It's even worse with blockchain, because you can't put everything on the blockchain, it needs to interact with the real world, and that's where you can cheat the system (like stealing the keys of people in retirement homes because they don't know what they are for - sure it happens with paper but it's harder to do and easier to catch them in the act).
People can be confident in paper votes because they can understand how to audit the result, and who does it. The best e-voting software in the world can provide that level of trust only to some engineers who know the code, and only if they can audit all the systems where the software is deployed.
It's like passwords, it can't work if part of the population has no clue why it's needed or how it works. It's even worse with blockchain, because you can't put everything on the blockchain, it needs to interact with the real world, and that's where you can cheat the system (like stealing the keys of people in retirement homes because they don't know what they are for - sure it happens with paper but it's harder to do and easier to catch them in the act).