Fine. But by that standard, in a world where someone can bring their phone or AI glasses into the voting booth to record the whole voting process, how can any voting system be deemed secure? Anyone can show anyone else how they voted.

> I was looking for a job during working on this and absolutely got some disappointing rejections, and one was because of my lack of skillset on things like this in a big tech company's interview. I literally failed the technical screening. Oh well.

This writeup deserves its own website, something with minimal CSS, where you'll discover a bunch of family snapshots and party photos if you click around.

The US at various time has had a system robust to these threats. A prerequisite has been an educated and well-informed electorate with at least a large majority committed to a shared set of national values.

This is one of the technical advantages of a blockchain-based system. As long as the keys are protected and signatures are generated in a secure environment, then the content of the message doesn't need to be secret to be secure.

It's not a solution to situations where privacy is desired, but if the reason for secrecy is simply to ensure that transactions are properly authorized (by avoiding the leakage of passwords and session information) then keeping the signature process secure should be sufficient even where general secrecy cannot be maintained.

Are there any circumstances where this hardware is accessible in the browser? As I understand, it is not generally available (if at all) for any cryptography you might want to do in the browser.

https://github.com/paveldedik/ludic/blob/main/examples/click...

It's the kind of thing that looks very cool and concise in small examples, but tends to become a nightmare when you are working on larger projects.

In 2000 neural networks had existed for more than 50 years. More than 20 years later their full potential is finally being realized, and many would say it is still early days.

It’s naive to think that you can predict the future course of a technology simply based on the fact that it has already existed for a certain amount of time.

I wasn’t aware of this, and I’m not sure I understand why this would be the case. Do you have any more information about this?

It's difficult to fight this cognitive bias that, I think, we all carry—but we must.

"...the Court concludes that Ripple’s Programmatic Sales of XRP did not constitute the offer and sale of investment contracts"

It is not only third party sales that were deemed not to be investment contracts—it was all programmatic sales. As I said, the federal court found that exchange-traded Ripple XRP tokens are not securities.

Also, you should know that the SEC has dropped the remaining charges that were to be tried in April. The next step in the litigation is an appeal of the summary judgement.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38414770