The Hammer and Scorecard system is presented as having capabilities that are almost magical and not realistic. There are however certain capabilities that many actors may have and have created that might surprise people. The problem is when it comes to technology is that even if these things are real people tend to make huge simple mistakes about their abilities and limitations.

You might have a system able to potentially assist with interfering with an election in many ways but it isn't a magic system capable of taking control over any election. Someone will can it can hack elections when what they mean is that it might be able to hack an election but it also might not.

Hammer describes what is basically traffic monitoring which does exist in many forms. Sort of a large scale packet sniffer. Scorecard has been described as something that can basically alter traffic (rather than read only for example). Those are standard and common technologies though they do not have infinite capabilities. However the government may be able to do a lot of things at a level that would give unusually more capabilities. They would potentially have access to what ISPs have, routes and what not plus their own hardware in shops and also things like private keys for signing their own SSL certs.

It's a great deal of power and potential but it's not something that can necessarily in any trivial undetectable way alter election results if basic security is used.

That kind of capability isn't really something we would think of as specific systems like "Hammer and Scorecard". There are a hell of a lot of actors with privileged access that can do various things. Just Facebook alone has huge amounts of data it can be shunting into an archive one way and then have people pouring over it analysing it and working on things like mapping traffic then being able to traffic shape, etc and also knowing exactly what to do to influence this many votes one way or another. You can bet you behind closed doors Facebook has algorithms with digital records for each user that is probably very good at predicting who they will vote for for example.

The profile advertisers may potentially have on you in secret behind closed doors would blow your mind. There's a rubbish Sci Fi series, Westworld but it has one good concept where there's something like that and it gets leaked showing each person the profile build up on them based on all their data. Though that sentient AI doesn't exist, that kind of database does exist for real to varying degrees and can exist almost to the full extent seen in that series. There few people even in things like advertising will see the secret data warehousing and the processing that goes on. It's a real concern that behind closed doors groups can merge their databases for some pretty nasty stuff.

The technology problem is a lot broader than if a system like Hammer and Scorecard exists. Some capabilities along those lines, though not the magical ones broadly exist. The biggest problem with all this is that showing someone such a thing as a lock pick doesn't prove that a specific lock was picked or could have been picked. It's a big distraction from doing the right thing and investigating the scene of the crime.

The Hammer and Scorecard system is presented as having capabilities that are almost magical and not realistic. There are however certain capabilities that many actors may have and have created that might surprise people. The problem is when it comes to technology is that even if these things are real people tend to make huge simple mistakes about their abilities and limitations.

You might have a system able to potentially assist with interfering with an election in many ways but it isn't a magic system capable of taking control over any election. Someone will can it can hack elections when what they mean is that it might be able to hack an election but it also might not.

Hammer describes what is basically traffic monitoring which does exist in many forms. Sort of a large scale packet sniffer. Scorecard has been described as something that can basically alter traffic (rather than read only for example). Those are standard and common technologies though they do not have infinite capabilities. However the government may be able to do a lot of things at a level that would give unusually more capabilities. They would potentially have access to what ISPs have, routes and what not plus their own hardware in shops and also things like private keys for signing their own SSL certs.

It's a great deal of power and potential but it's not something that can necessarily in any trivial undetectable way alter election results if basic security is used.

That kind of capability isn't really something we would think of as specific systems like "Hammer and Scorecard". There are a hell of a lot of actors with privileged access that can do various things. Just Facebook alone has huge amounts of data it can be shunting into an archive one way and then have people pouring over it analysing it and working on things like mapping traffic then being able to traffic shape, etc and also knowing exactly what to do to influence this many votes one way or another. You can bet you behind closed doors Facebook has algorithms with digital records for each user that is probably very good at predicting who they will vote for for example.

The profile advertisers may potentially have on you in secret behind closed doors would blow your mind. There's a rubbish Sci Fi series, Westworld but it has one good concept where there's something like that and it gets leaked showing each person the profile build up on them based on all their data. Though that sentient AI doesn't exist, that kind of database does exist for real to varying degrees and can exist almost to the full extent seen in that series. There few people even in things like advertising will see the secret data warehousing and the processing that goes on. It's a real concern that behind closed doors groups can merge their databases for some pretty nasty stuff.

The technology problem is a lot broader than if a system like Hammer and Scorecard exists. Some capabilities along those lines, though not the magical ones broadly exist. The biggest problem with all this is that showing someone such a thing as a lock pick doesn't prove that a specific lock was picked or could have been picked.

The Hammer and Scorecard system is presented as having capabilities that are almost magical and not realistic. There are however certain capabilities that many actors may have and have created that might surprise people. The problem is when it comes to technology is that even if these things are real people tend to make huge simple mistakes about their abilities and limitations.

You might have a system able to potentially assist with interfering with an election in many ways but it isn't a magic system capable of taking control over any election. Someone will can it can hack elections when what they mean is that it might be able to hack an election but it also might not.

Hammer describes what is basically traffic monitoring which does exist in many forms. Sort of a large scale packet sniffer. Scorecard has been described as something that can basically alter traffic (rather than read only for example). Those are standard and common technologies though they do not have infinite capabilities. However the government may be able to do a lot of things at a level that would give unusually more capabilities. They would potentially have access to what ISPs have, routes and what not plus their own hardware in shops and also things like private keys for signing their own SSL certs.

It's a great deal of power and potential but it's not something that can necessarily in any trivial undetectable way alter election results if basic security is used.

That kind of capability isn't really something we would think of as specific systems like "Hammer and Scorecard". There are a hell of a lot of actors with privileged access that can do various things. Just Facebook alone has huge amounts of data it can be shunting into an archive one way and then have people pouring over it analysing it and working on things like mapping traffic then being able to traffic shape, etc and also knowing exactly what to do to influence this many votes one way or another. You can bet you behind closed doors Facebook has algorithms with digital records for each user that is probably very good at predicting who they will vote for for example.

The profile advertisers may potentially have on you in secret behind closed doors would blow your mind. There's a rubbish Sci Fi series, Westworld but it has one good concept where there's something like that and it gets leaked showing each person the profile build up on them based on all their data. Though that sentient AI doesn't exist, that kind of database does exist for real to varying degrees and can exist almost to the full extent seen in that series. There few people even in things like advertising will see the secret data warehousing and the processing that goes on. It's a real concern that behind closed doors groups can merge their databases for some pretty nasty stuff.

The technology problem is a lot broader than if a system like Hammer and Scorecard exists. Some capabilities along those lines, though not the magical ones broadly exist.

The Hammer and Scorecard system is presented as having capabilities that are almost magical and not realistic. There are however certain capabilities that many actors may have and have created that might surprise people. The problem is when it comes to technology is that even if these things are real people tend to make huge simple mistakes about their abilities and limitations.

You might have a system able to potentially assist with interfering with an election in many ways but it isn't a magic system capable of taking control over any election. Someone will can it can hack elections when what they mean is that it might be able to hack an election but it also might not.

Hammer describes what is basically traffic monitoring which does exist in many forms. Sort of a large scale packet sniffer. Scorecard has been described as something that can basically alter traffic (rather than read only for example). Those are standard and common technologies though they do not have infinite capabilities. However the government may be able to do a lot of things at a level that would give unusually more capabilities. They would potentially have access to what ISPs have, routes and what not plus their own hardware in shops and also things like private keys for signing their own SSL certs.

It's a great deal of power and potential but it's not something that can necessarily in any trivial undetectable way alter election results if basic security is used.

That kind of capability isn't really something we would think of as specific systems like "Hammer and Scorecard". There are a hell of a lot of actors with privileged access that can do various things. Just Facebook alone has huge amounts of data it can be shunting into an archive one way and then have people pouring over it analysing it and working on things like mapping traffic then being able to traffic shape, etc and also knowing exactly what to do to influence this many votes one way or another. You can bet you behind closed doors Facebook has algorithms with digital records for each user that is probably very good at predicting who they will vote for for example.

The profile advertisers may potentially have on you in secret behind closed doors would blow your mind. There's a rubbish Sci Fi series, Westworld but it has one good concept where there's something like that and it gets leaked showing each person the profile build up on them based on all their data. Though that sentient AI doesn't exist, that kind of database does exist for real to varying degrees and can exist almost to the full extent seen in that series. There few people even in things like advertising will see the secret data warehousing and the processing that goes on. It's a real concern that behind closed doors groups can merge their databases for some pretty nasty stuff.

The technology problem is a lot broader than if a system like Hammer and Scorecard exists. Some capabilities along those lines, though not the magical ones broadly exist.

The Hammer and Scorecard system is presented as having capabilities that are almost magical and not realistic. There are however certain capabilities that many actors may have and have created that might surprise people. The problem is when it comes to technology is that even if these things are real people tend to make huge simple mistakes about their abilities and limitations.

You might have a system able to potentially assist with interfering with an election in many ways but it isn't a magic system capable of taking control over any election. Someone will can it can hack elections when what they mean is that it might be able to hack an election but it also might not.

Hammer describes what is basically traffic monitoring which does exist in many forms. Sort of a large scale packet sniffer. Scorecard has been described as something that can basically alter traffic (rather than read only for example). Those are standard and common technologies though they do not have infinite capabilities. However the government may be able to do a lot of things at a level that would give unusually more capabilities. They would potentially have access to what ISPs have, routes and what not plus their own hardware in shops and also things like private keys for signing their own SSL certs.

It's a great deal of power and potential but it's not something that can necessarily in any trivial undetectable way alter election results if basic security is used.

That kind of capability isn't really something we would think of as specific systems like "Hammer and Scorecard". There are a hell of a lot of actors with privileged access that can do various things. Just Facebook alone has huge amounts of data it can be shunting into an archive one way and then have people pouring over it analysing it and working on things like mapping traffic then being able to traffic shape, etc and also knowing exactly what to do to influence this many votes one way or another. You can bet you behind closed doors Facebook has algorithms with digital records for each user that is probably very good at predicting who they will vote for for example.

The profile advertisers may potentially have on you in secret behind closed doors would blow your mind. There's a rubbish Sci Fi series, Westworld but it has one good concept where there's something like that and it gets leaked. Though that sentient AI doesn't exist, that kind of database does exist for real to varying degrees and can exist almost to the full extent seen in that series. There few people even in things like advertising will see the secret data warehousing and the processing that goes on. It's a real concern that behind closed doors groups can merge their databases for some pretty nasty stuff.

The technology problem is a lot broader than if a system like Hammer and Scorecard exists. Some capabilities along those lines, though not the magical ones broadly exist.

The Hammer and Scorecard system is presented as having capabilities that are almost magical and not realistic. There are however certain capabilities that many actors may have and have created that might surprise people. The problem is when it comes to technology is that even if these things are real people tend to make huge simple mistakes about their abilities and limitations.

You might have a system able to potentially assist with interfering with an election in many ways but it isn't a magic system capable of taking control over any election. Someone will can it can hack elections when what they mean is that it might be able to hack an election but it also might not.

Hammer describes what is basically traffic monitoring which does exist in many forms. Sort of a large scale packet sniffer. Scorecard has been described as something that can basically alter traffic (rather than read only for example). Those are standard and common technologies though they do not have infinite capabilities. However the government may be able to do a lot of things at a level that would give unusually more capabilities. They would potentially have access to what ISPs have, routes and what not plus their own hardware in shops and also things like private keys for signing their own SSL certs.

It's a great deal of power and potential but it's not something that can necessarily in any trivial undetectable way alter election results if basic security is used.

That kind of capability isn't really something we would think of as specific systems like "Hammer and Scorecard". There are a hell of a lot of actors with privileged access that can do various things. Just Facebook alone has huge amounts of data it can be shunting into an archive one way and then have people pouring over it analysing it and working on things like mapping traffic then being able to traffic shape, etc and also knowing exactly what to do to influence this many votes one way or another. You can bet you behind closed doors Facebook has algorithms with digital records for each user that is probably very good at predicting who they will vote for for example.

The technology problem is a lot broader than if a system like Hammer and Scorecard exists. Some capabilities along those lines, though not the magical ones broadly exist.