Technology and society: which of the following scenarios is least likely to occur in the near future, considering technical, social, and policy constraints?

Introduction / Context:
Predicting technology adoption requires more than technical feasibility; social acceptance, policy, equity, and security constraints matter. Some ideas sound plausible but face steep barriers that make them unlikely in the near term.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• “Near future” refers to short-to-medium time horizons, not several decades out.
• Consider legal, cybersecurity, access, and inclusivity constraints.
• Assume typical democratic processes and labor market dynamics.

Concept / Approach:
Nationwide remote voting “by pushing buttons at home” implies internet voting for high-stakes elections. Despite pilot projects, widespread adoption faces unresolved challenges: ballot secrecy, end-to-end verifiability, coercion resistance, device malware, digital divide, and public trust. By contrast, public debate about information-assistance programs is plausible; hybrid/remote work has grown but will not eliminate workplaces entirely; and automation’s labor impacts are ongoing and contested but plausible in the near term.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Election-security communities and risk-limiting audit advocates highlight open issues with internet voting. Meanwhile, remote work, automation, and information-assistance debates continue to expand.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Information-assistance program debate: Politically plausible and recurring.
• Traditional workplace disappearance: Overstated; however, hybrid work increased—still more plausible than nationwide home-button presidential voting.
• Automation impacts: Already observable in many sectors.

Common Pitfalls:
Equating technical possibility with policy readiness; ignoring coercion and verifiability problems in remote voting.

Final Answer:
the presidential election will be done by pushing buttons at home