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.
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.