Yes, they did.

But I think that the main reason is that Brazil's elections were a lot dirtier and a lot more unreliable than Switzerland's.

What I mean is that the push towards e-voting is much stronger in countries with unreliable elections, because e-voting is harder to tamper than the crude ways you can defraud paper ballots.

Switzerland's and other organized countries have elections that are "good enough", so the push towards e-voting is probably not that strong.

Is the "leapfrog" concept. Sometimes it is easier to adopt newer technologies in places where the existing ones are horrible. Other examples: electronic payment systems, solar panels and EVs in India and Africa.

Actually I don't understand the push towards e-voting in countries like Switzerland. E-voting can be hacked from the other side of the world, because it happens on computers. In-person voting or physical mail is much harder to hack from the other side of the world.

Most of the push for e-voting in Switzerland is from the Swiss abroad (10% of the electorate), who have a right to vote, but whose exercise of that right is subject to the vagaries of the international postal system. I personally have had problems with receiving postal ballots from Australia to Switzerland with not enough time to return them; presumably Swiss voters in Australia have similar problems, let alone less-developed countries.

That's easily fixed by extending the deadline. No new technology is required.

It's not necessarily easy. The timing of Australian elections from issuance of writs is limited by the constitution, and since they can occur at the discretion of the prime minister, you can't prepare for them in advance.

Swiss votes are scheduled in advance, but the explanatory material and campaign flyers still have to be made and in order to be topical you don't want to make them too early. In particular the consequences of previous votes can effect the upcoming votes - e.g. the referendum voted on last Sunday impacts one of the initiatives that will be voted on this June, so nothing could really be prepared until the outcome of the former was known.

Constitutions can be amended and there are courier services that are faster than the general post.

Can't talk about Switzerland, don't know the particularities.

But in continental countries like Brazil it makes a lot of sense. It is cheaper, faster and safer.

> E-voting can be hacked from the other side of the world, because it happens on computers

How do you "hack from the other side of the world" a computer that isn't even online? True, the transmission of computed results is made online, but keeping that safe is trivial, banks do it.

> How do you "hack from the other side of the world" a computer that isn't even online?

E-voting in this case means that they can vote from their computer, ipad or mobile phone. They are connected to the internet.

> How do you "hack from the other side of the world" a computer that isn't even online?

Supply chain attacks. You just need to get in there before everything is cryptographically signed and sealed.

The best part is even if they published the source code for everything it would prove nothing. I seriously doubt the builds are reproducible. Lack of source-to-binary correspondence means source code would serve only to embarrass anyone protesting the electronic voting system.

As it stands, nothing short of a full audit of the complete signed software image that the machine booted and executed on election day would suffice. The judge-kings are on the record saying this system is UNQUESTIONABLE so they should publish the image on the internet and let the whole world take a look. I'm sure no faults will be found.

Not really. It started with hundreds of thousands of votes.

That said, Brazilian elections are completely unverifiable. They don't seem to be false, but it's hard to say anything that would be different if they were.

When it started, at the 90s, the machines were at least simpler and possible to verify up to the firmwares. Nowadays, they are not.