The risk I’m worried about isn’t insufficient randomness (I think this is what’s alleged in the lottery story). I’m worried that the hat-picker could collude with one of the candidates to increase their chance of winning.
This is sort-of a “the AI is smarter than you” situation where I don’t know exactly how they’d do it, but I imagine if you gave Penn & Teller a hat, a pen, and a stack of paper, they could convincingly select the same “random” piece of paper over and over again. And even if they couldn’t actually do it, if some voters are convinced that they did, then your election still has a legitimacy problem.
The risk I’m worried about isn’t insufficient randomness (I think this is what’s alleged in the lottery story). I’m worried that the hat-picker could collude with one of the candidates to increase their chance of winning.
This is sort-of a “the AI is smarter than you” situation where I don’t know exactly how they’d do it, but I imagine if you gave Penn & Teller a hat, a pen, and a stack of paper, they could convincingly select the same “random” piece of paper over and over again. And even if they couldn’t actually do it, if some voters are convinced that they did, then your election still has a legitimacy problem.