2026-09-14 17:56 UTC
Judge Nichols' opinion underscores an important point generally about elections: "once the election occurs, there can be no do-over and no redress."
This is at the core of why elections (in both law and technology) are such a hard problem. If you discover after the fact that something went wrong, there's generally little or nothing you can do about it. You have to *prevent* problems and get it right the first time.
@heidilifeldman@mastodon.social
Replies (1)
-
@mattblaze@federate.social 2026-09-14 18:05
Notably (and unfortunately), security technology (as used in elections and everywhere else) is generally much better at detecting problems than it is at preventing them. Cryptographic authenticators can show whether data has been altered, but doesn't prevent alteration. Physical seals can reveal that something was tampered with, but don't prevent the tampering. Prevention requires much more complex protocols and procedures, and generally provides only fragile assurances. @heidilifeldman@mastodon.social