It's three years later. How much longer could you drag this news out?

I could be misremembering, but I feel like I remember them admitting it in Arizona, too.

Just a reminder, they are actively trying to steal this phrase right now.

Oh? I'm out of the loop on this one. Any links to this sort of idiodicy? I'm genuinely curious how they could possibly coopt this.

Plus Roberts makes three in total.

Let me reiterate that: an entire third of the current Supreme Court worked in furtherance of a successful Republican coup 24 years ago.

And Kavanaugh was one of the lawyers who was investigating Clinton in one of the most obviously politically-motivated independent counsel investigations in modern history

Dude was pushing Q Anon theories before it was cool

Kavanaugh also argued in favor of investigating the suicide of Vince Foster, the White House deputy counsel, even though two prior investigations had already concluded that his death was a suicide.

Republicans were against that in 2000, I imagine they still are

There's a bunch of proprietary systems

interface with another company jealously guarding their own implementation

See, this is dumb. Not you, I mean. Program to format text documents and automate office paperwork, sure. I prefer TeX but YMMV. But how do you commercialise voting? Oh, "it's America". I guess.

There was a good Tom Scott that pointed out the problem of electronic voting is not just the reliability and trustworthiness of the systems, but the transparency for ordinary people to know it's trustworthy.

You can't achieve that perfectly with computers - not even with paper - but it's important. Obviously to me, that would mean having the system open source, with closed (for extra security) extra measures for auditing. I understand them not doing that, but the government not wanting the voting software and systems to be fully open to government? That just blows the mind ...though I kind of expected it.

As to redundancy and lack of bugs, there are some impressive programs out there by people who've got what it takes to make things very precise from formal definitions and so on (cf some of the Functional Programming community, amongst others, and certain un-bloated well-defined security things). Does the American government not have access to such people? Did they spend all their money on TV shows so they've none left for good programmers? And tallying election votes is not really the most elaborate of tasks, more one that needs formally defining very carefully. No ML professors left over from the dark ages who can write a formal spec as a PhD? How about all those NSA lot who are supposed to be able to make spyware so clever it slips between the cracks in Apple phones? I suppose that's a field more of try lots of things and hope some work, but still.

Sorry, rant over ;-)

sTuNnInG

You know what? In that context, I guess I am stunned.

Just to be clear, they look more like ADAT/VHS cassettes than they do those big spools of reel-to-reel you see in movies with old mainframes. Pretty sure the only people who use those tapes anymore are the computer museums with working examples on display.