Matt Blaze
@mattblaze.org
Scientist, safecracker, etc. McDevitt Professor of Computer Science and Law at Georgetown. So-called expert on election security and a few other things. Slow photographer. RF nerd. Occasionally blogs at https://mattblaze.org/blog
A reminder that if I block you, it’s definitely because I’m afraid of your superior intellect, arguments, and attractiveness. It has nothing to do with your being an annoying, toxic dimwit.
November 14, 2025 at 9:05 PM
A reminder that if I block you, it’s definitely because I’m afraid of your superior intellect, arguments, and attractiveness. It has nothing to do with your being an annoying, toxic dimwit.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
a lot of people regretting the 'this shoulda been an email' advice rn lol
November 13, 2025 at 3:57 AM
a lot of people regretting the 'this shoulda been an email' advice rn lol
Reposted by Matt Blaze
My mentions here currently consist of a steady barrage of election deniers challenging me to prove the negative proposition that the 2024 election wasn't stolen (which is not how it works).
So if I miss your reasonable, non-shouty post to me, I apologie.
So if I miss your reasonable, non-shouty post to me, I apologie.
November 13, 2025 at 6:49 PM
My mentions here currently consist of a steady barrage of election deniers challenging me to prove the negative proposition that the 2024 election wasn't stolen (which is not how it works).
So if I miss your reasonable, non-shouty post to me, I apologie.
So if I miss your reasonable, non-shouty post to me, I apologie.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
About me: I'm an election security expert with two decades of experience. I've led comprehensive security assessments on behalf of states of their voting tech. I've testified in congress several times about election vulnerabilities. I run a major election security conference.
The claims are BS.
The claims are BS.
November 12, 2025 at 12:08 AM
About me: I'm an election security expert with two decades of experience. I've led comprehensive security assessments on behalf of states of their voting tech. I've testified in congress several times about election vulnerabilities. I run a major election security conference.
The claims are BS.
The claims are BS.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
The only differences between these claims about 2024 and the claims that the election was stolen from Trump in 2020 are:
- The losing candidate isn't amplifying the BS this time.
- No one stormed the Capitol this time
- No one is offering discount coupons for lumpy mail-order pillows this time.
- The losing candidate isn't amplifying the BS this time.
- No one stormed the Capitol this time
- No one is offering discount coupons for lumpy mail-order pillows this time.
November 12, 2025 at 12:12 AM
The only differences between these claims about 2024 and the claims that the election was stolen from Trump in 2020 are:
- The losing candidate isn't amplifying the BS this time.
- No one stormed the Capitol this time
- No one is offering discount coupons for lumpy mail-order pillows this time.
- The losing candidate isn't amplifying the BS this time.
- No one stormed the Capitol this time
- No one is offering discount coupons for lumpy mail-order pillows this time.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
There ARE real vulnerabilities in some of our election infrastructure, and this is absolutely a problem that we should fix (and on which significant progress has been made). But the mere existence of vulnerabilities is not evidence of fraud.
November 11, 2025 at 11:53 PM
There ARE real vulnerabilities in some of our election infrastructure, and this is absolutely a problem that we should fix (and on which significant progress has been made). But the mere existence of vulnerabilities is not evidence of fraud.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
They also have no credible theory of how this massive-scale fraud was supposedly carried out, eiither technically or logistically. They just make vague observations about a few know vulnerabilities in some systems, with no indication that even these were actually exploited.
It's supremely weak tea.
It's supremely weak tea.
November 11, 2025 at 11:50 PM
They also have no credible theory of how this massive-scale fraud was supposedly carried out, eiither technically or logistically. They just make vague observations about a few know vulnerabilities in some systems, with no indication that even these were actually exploited.
It's supremely weak tea.
It's supremely weak tea.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
They're conning statistically unsophisticated, disappointed voters with impressive-looking, but meaningless, "analysis" that tell people what they want to believe.
Then they challenge you to prove a negative - "if this is wrong, just show there WASN'T fraud". That's not how it works.
Then they challenge you to prove a negative - "if this is wrong, just show there WASN'T fraud". That's not how it works.
November 11, 2025 at 11:38 PM
They're conning statistically unsophisticated, disappointed voters with impressive-looking, but meaningless, "analysis" that tell people what they want to believe.
Then they challenge you to prove a negative - "if this is wrong, just show there WASN'T fraud". That's not how it works.
Then they challenge you to prove a negative - "if this is wrong, just show there WASN'T fraud". That's not how it works.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
In particular, all they're doing is "analyzing" precinct and mail-in voting tailles from different places and claiming the results are "suspicious". Except:
- They aren't. They're readily explained by unsurprising demographic differences.
- Even if they were, that's not how you show fraud.
- They aren't. They're readily explained by unsurprising demographic differences.
- Even if they were, that's not how you show fraud.
November 11, 2025 at 11:34 PM
In particular, all they're doing is "analyzing" precinct and mail-in voting tailles from different places and claiming the results are "suspicious". Except:
- They aren't. They're readily explained by unsurprising demographic differences.
- Even if they were, that's not how you show fraud.
- They aren't. They're readily explained by unsurprising demographic differences.
- Even if they were, that's not how you show fraud.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
There's a reason that the candidates who supposedly had their offices stolen from them want nothing to do with this nonsense.
November 11, 2025 at 11:22 PM
There's a reason that the candidates who supposedly had their offices stolen from them want nothing to do with this nonsense.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
Asserting that a presidential election outcome was altered is an *extraordinary* claim, and requires significant, compelling evidence to back up. But the "evidence" being presented is nonsense. A bunch of statistics about "voting patters" that don't actually show anything surprising or suspicious.
November 11, 2025 at 11:21 PM
Asserting that a presidential election outcome was altered is an *extraordinary* claim, and requires significant, compelling evidence to back up. But the "evidence" being presented is nonsense. A bunch of statistics about "voting patters" that don't actually show anything surprising or suspicious.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
I would LOVE to believe the "election truth" people who claim the 2024 presidential race results have suspicious anomalies that indicate fraud. Politics aside, it would vindicate warnings from my collegues and that elections systems have serious vulnerabilities.
But there's just nothing there.
But there's just nothing there.
November 11, 2025 at 11:15 PM
I would LOVE to believe the "election truth" people who claim the 2024 presidential race results have suspicious anomalies that indicate fraud. Politics aside, it would vindicate warnings from my collegues and that elections systems have serious vulnerabilities.
But there's just nothing there.
But there's just nothing there.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
One example of the harm of disinformation that the #ConspiracyEntrepreneurs couldn't care less about
bsky.app/profile/than...
bsky.app/profile/than...
In October of 24, we asked Americans how confident they were in our elections. We found that Americans who trust elections are more likely to vote than those that do not.
This is why it matters that people trust elections - election denial can lower participation
statesunited.org/resources/wh...
This is why it matters that people trust elections - election denial can lower participation
statesunited.org/resources/wh...
When Americans Trust Elections, They Are More Likely To Vote - States United Democracy Center
statesunited.org
November 13, 2025 at 3:55 AM
One example of the harm of disinformation that the #ConspiracyEntrepreneurs couldn't care less about
bsky.app/profile/than...
bsky.app/profile/than...
Reposted by Matt Blaze
As the first law professor in the US to teach a Sex Crimes course, I have two words for Megyn Kelly: Just stop.
in case you're wondering how the cope is going www.mediamatters.org/megyn-kelly/...
November 13, 2025 at 3:32 AM
As the first law professor in the US to teach a Sex Crimes course, I have two words for Megyn Kelly: Just stop.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
As someone deeply concerned professionally with securing elections, i think making unfounded claims that elections are being rigged is an extremely harmful grift, that deserves strong condemnation.
November 13, 2025 at 2:19 AM
As someone deeply concerned professionally with securing elections, i think making unfounded claims that elections are being rigged is an extremely harmful grift, that deserves strong condemnation.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
"What's the harm?". The harm is that these supposed "suspicious patterns" aren't actually suspicious, but they're being misleadingly sold to disappointed voters to support a completely baseless conspiracy theory that degrades the democratic process.
November 13, 2025 at 1:46 AM
"What's the harm?". The harm is that these supposed "suspicious patterns" aren't actually suspicious, but they're being misleadingly sold to disappointed voters to support a completely baseless conspiracy theory that degrades the democratic process.
I would LOVE to believe the "election truth" people who claim the 2024 presidential race results have suspicious anomalies that indicate fraud. Politics aside, it would vindicate warnings from my collegues and that elections systems have serious vulnerabilities.
But there's just nothing there.
But there's just nothing there.
November 11, 2025 at 11:15 PM
I would LOVE to believe the "election truth" people who claim the 2024 presidential race results have suspicious anomalies that indicate fraud. Politics aside, it would vindicate warnings from my collegues and that elections systems have serious vulnerabilities.
But there's just nothing there.
But there's just nothing there.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
Loving today's news that the mysterious "fedora man" outside the Louvre heist was actually a 15-year-old museum visitor who dresses like a 1940s French detective all the time, just because. apnews.com/article/louv...
Fedora man unmasked: Meet the teen behind the Louvre mystery photo
Fifteen-year-old Pedro Elias Garzon Delvaux has become an internet sensation after an Associated Press photo captured him outside the Louvre on the day of a crown jewels heist.
apnews.com
November 9, 2025 at 12:16 PM
Loving today's news that the mysterious "fedora man" outside the Louvre heist was actually a 15-year-old museum visitor who dresses like a 1940s French detective all the time, just because. apnews.com/article/louv...
Reposted by Matt Blaze
As an academic, I have actually published a few things here and there.
November 9, 2025 at 5:56 PM
As an academic, I have actually published a few things here and there.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
I get where you're coming from, but I think there's value in experts engaging with people. I've certainly benefited from interacting with and reading experts in other fields on social media.
November 9, 2025 at 5:54 PM
I get where you're coming from, but I think there's value in experts engaging with people. I've certainly benefited from interacting with and reading experts in other fields on social media.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
If I may, it’s not worth fighting in the muck with people. There’s always another to come along after and rehash the same ole fight.
A published article is worth 10,000 fights in the weeds.
A published article is worth 10,000 fights in the weeds.
November 9, 2025 at 5:48 PM
If I may, it’s not worth fighting in the muck with people. There’s always another to come along after and rehash the same ole fight.
A published article is worth 10,000 fights in the weeds.
A published article is worth 10,000 fights in the weeds.
Oddly enough, weeks of being insulted and browbeaten by anonymous strangers here about the actual subject I work on in my day job has NOT led me to reconsider my position.
November 9, 2025 at 5:30 PM
Oddly enough, weeks of being insulted and browbeaten by anonymous strangers here about the actual subject I work on in my day job has NOT led me to reconsider my position.
Subway's bread is notoriously squishy and pliable. Any fear of injury would disappear the moment you saw the wrapper. Throwing a Subway sandwich is like shooting with a nerf gun.
Now if it were a more substantial bread - say a bagel - prosecutors might have had a more viable case.
Now if it were a more substantial bread - say a bagel - prosecutors might have had a more viable case.
Sandwich verdict wasn’t jury nullification. It was failure to prove the required “reasonable fear of physical injury” in a case where the agent was wearing A BULLETPROOF VEST. The only crime was the waste of resources on this case. My thoughts in @MSNBCDaily.
www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnb...
www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnb...
Opinion | The sandwich thrower was wrong. But Jeanine Pirro was, too.
To establish a forcible assault, jurors were required to find that Dunn caused “reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm.” That allegation was laughable.
www.msnbc.com
November 9, 2025 at 1:48 AM
Subway's bread is notoriously squishy and pliable. Any fear of injury would disappear the moment you saw the wrapper. Throwing a Subway sandwich is like shooting with a nerf gun.
Now if it were a more substantial bread - say a bagel - prosecutors might have had a more viable case.
Now if it were a more substantial bread - say a bagel - prosecutors might have had a more viable case.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
pre-writing a devastating obituary for your enemy is god-tier hating of a kind you don’t often see anymore. renaissance haterism. beautiful stuff.
A Sharon Begley byline, almost 5 years after her death.
Upon hearing the news James Watson had died, a STAT reporter said in our Slack, "I wish I could read what Sharon would have written."
Incredible news: Sharon in fact did pre-write a Watson obit. And it is masterful and excoriating.
🧪🧬🧫
Upon hearing the news James Watson had died, a STAT reporter said in our Slack, "I wish I could read what Sharon would have written."
Incredible news: Sharon in fact did pre-write a Watson obit. And it is masterful and excoriating.
🧪🧬🧫
James Watson, dead at 97, was a scientific legend and a pariah among his peers
James Watson, the co-discoverer of the structure of DNA who died Thursday at 97, was a scientific legend and a pariah among his peers.
www.statnews.com
November 9, 2025 at 12:55 AM
pre-writing a devastating obituary for your enemy is god-tier hating of a kind you don’t often see anymore. renaissance haterism. beautiful stuff.