I will not discount the possibility that the story has placed as a cover for certain ops. Spooks run disinformation too, even spooks on our side. Standard tradecraft.
After all, remote viewing research of CIA etc may be mostly a cover too, say for Project Looking Glass, and so on. There is a huge amount of info that we do not know about their world of shadows. Ditto with the Satanic Elites etc. Hidden world. Hidden history.
As such, I have a healthy amount of skepticism as to what is real and what is a cover story or disinformation. GEOTUS in some past exploits loved to sow a certain amount of chaos too. Keeps others off-balanced. Anyway I know I will never qualify for a career in cheerleading, haha.
The stories which started these theories spouted nonsense about GPS, clearly demonstrating that they know nothing about actual tech. GPS signals can't affect anything either, because their signal strength extremely weak, down in the noise regime and you need a CDMA code to tease it out above the noise floor. A piece of paper can't do anything with GPS signals.
Watermarks, by traditional definitions, are visible. Any actual evidence of paper stock being prepped as such? There are other such tech, mind you, like yellow dots used by color printers. Or invisible inks, if it's spook run. But how useful is tracking paper stock (for example) anyway, since there are so many ways to do voting fraud.
Do the people who originated the stories even know how quantum computing works? Or how blockchain works? Any stories that actually investigated, instead or repeating speculative info? Oh, if the blockchain is originated by one secretive party only and there is no distribution of trust by some kind of verifiable work unit, then we're back to trusting one party. Negates a lot of [distributed] blockchain benefits.
Oh, voting software tricks negate any physical security tech. And you can't secretly scan some kind of watermark using Dominion, because Dominion is controlled by the enemy. Enemy-controlled software. So you can't link watermarks with Dominion data. Electronic fraud is far bigger and most easily done.
All I want to see is some second source to the story. Not all the repeats ad nausem. Something useful with solid tech info. Plausible tech info.
The patent you provided does not work with or like the rumored quantum blockchain thing. All completely different. Nothing quantum about the patent you provided.
I wrote my posts myself, never copied. I have at least some familiarity with a lot of the tech. I can clarify anything you don't agree with.
The patent will require lots of communication, verification, there is a chain of trust, etc. All this cannot be completely hidden from the Dominion system or the printers who print the ballots. One way of hiding ID info from non-friendly printers is to tag the paper, that's why I focus on how paper may be tagged. Remember, who are friendlies and who are adversaries? Things must be hidden from adversaries.
Also, the patent has a lot of detail about the voting-side processes, but note that like most patents, a lot of it is hand-waving. True security requires years of real-world use to prove bugs are worked out and vulns squashed. There is no proof of anything secure in the wording of the patent. In computing, security is hard.
The patent doesn't really say much about the distributed blockchain. But researchers have talked about taking-over attacks on distributed blockchains. Even today's blockchains get updates when vulns are found. If one party corners the work units, then is the ledger still provably secure with the correct data? The patents never discusses such things. It's all hand waving, grabbing a legal patent foothold.
Anyone who thinks blockchains are magical solutions are like sausage connoisseurs who have no idea how sausages are made.
I will not discount the possibility that the story has placed as a cover for certain ops. Spooks run disinformation too, even spooks on our side. Standard tradecraft.
After all, remote viewing research of CIA etc may be mostly a cover too, say for Project Looking Glass, and so on. There is a huge amount of info that we do not know about their world of shadows. Ditto with the Satanic Elites etc. Hidden world. Hidden history.
As such, I have a healthy amount of skepticism as to what is real and what is a cover story or disinformation. GEOTUS in some past exploits loved to sow a certain amount of chaos too. Keeps others off-balanced. Anyway I know I will never qualify for a career in cheerleading, haha.
The stories which started these theories spouted nonsense about GPS, clearly demonstrating that they know nothing about actual tech. GPS signals can't affect anything either, because their signal strength extremely weak, down in the noise regime and you need a CDMA code to tease it out above the noise floor. A piece of paper can't do anything with GPS signals.
Watermarks, by traditional definitions, are visible. Any actual evidence of paper stock being prepped as such? There are other such tech, mind you, like yellow dots used by color printers. Or invisible inks, if it's spook run. But how useful is tracking paper stock (for example) anyway, since there are so many ways to do voting fraud.
Do the people who originated the stories even know how quantum computing works? Or how blockchain works? Any stories that actually investigated, instead or repeating speculative info? Oh, if the blockchain is originated by one secretive party only and there is no distribution of trust by some kind of verifiable work unit, then we're back to trusting one party. Negates a lot of [distributed] blockchain benefits.
Oh, voting software tricks negate any physical security tech. And you can't secretly scan some kind of watermark using Dominion, because Dominion is controlled by the enemy. Enemy-controlled software. So you can't link watermarks with Dominion data. Electronic fraud is far bigger and most easily done.
All I want to see is some second source to the story. Not all the repeats ad nausem. Something useful with solid tech info. Plausible tech info.
The patent you provided does not work with or like the rumored quantum blockchain thing. All completely different. Nothing quantum about the patent you provided.
I wrote my posts myself, never copied. I have at least some familiarity with a lot of the tech. I can clarify anything you don't agree with.
The patent will require lots of communication, verification, there is a chain of trust, etc. All this cannot be completely hidden from the Dominion system or the printers who print the ballots. One way of hiding ID info from non-friendly printers is to tag the paper, that's why I focus on how paper may be tagged. Remember, who are friendlies and who are adversaries? Things must be hidden from adversaries.
Also, the patent has a lot of detail about the voting-side processes, but note that like most patents, a lot of it is hand-waving. True security requires years of real-world use to prove bugs are worked out and vulns squashed. There is no proof of anything secure in the wording of the patent. In computing, security is hard.
The patent doesn't really say much about the distributed blockchain. But researchers have talked about taking-over attacks on distributed blockchains. Even today's blockchains get updates when vulns are found. If one party corners the work units, then is the ledger still provably secure with the correct data? The patents never discusses such things. It's all hand waving, grabbing a legal patent foothold.
Anyone who thinks blockchains are magical solutions are like sausage connoisseurs who have no idea how sausages are made.