2 ms·
It’s not about dismissing but prioritizing. Election hacking is an actual, imminent national security threat. Intelligence agencies are scrambling to prevent o
by zapita 6y ago
It’s not about dismissing but prioritizing.
Election hacking is an actual, imminent national security threat. Intelligence agencies are scrambling to prevent or mitigate it right now.
In-person voting fraud on the other hand, as a meaningful threat, is entirely hypothetical.
Imagine if, at the height of the Cuban missile crisis, someone said “ok Soviet missiles within reach of the east coast is a threat; but what if vegan extremists blew up the white house tomorrow? Theoretically it could happen, so let’s not dismiss the threat!” That’s how different those two threat profiles actually are.
- justapassenger 6y agoI do think majority of the effort should be spent on protection from hacking, but dismissing other very real attack vector as entirely hypothetical is just naive. Last elections were decided by 80k votes, in a country with 250M eligible voters. With such a tight margins we have a lot of valid attack vectors, not only most obvious hacking ones. Effective organizations are (and should be) able to deal with many risks at once. Do you think that during Cuban missiles crisis all other investigations stopped, and 100% of CIA, FBI, Police, Army etc focused on Cuba?
- learc83 6y ago>With such a tight margins we have a lot of valid attack vectors In person voter fraud--the kind stopped by requiring poll workers to check ID--isn't one of them. You would need thousands of coordinated attackers to change 80k votes. It's just not a feasible attack.