You Can't Trust What You See Anymore | Bryan Jacoutot

Jacoutot describes Bitcoin-based timestamping as a way to preserve evidence of what election records contained and when they existed: Guatemala digitized and hashed physical records, while Screven County hashed and timestamped its certified 2024 result. He cautions that hashing can reveal later alteration but cannot prevent fraud before records are digitized and hashed.

Jacoutot expects a tight 2026 election cycle, with control of Congress and multiple governorships at stake, and warns that generative AI could make fabricated footage—such as videos based on Georgia drop-box livestreams—convincing enough to sow distrust. He says digital verification can help identify changes to recorded files but is not a complete solution to the broader problem of distinguishing authentic content from fabricated material.

Jacoutot argues that hashing digital evidence before a dispute can make later authentication more efficient: for signed contracts, matching a Bitcoin-recorded hash could create a rebuttable presumption of authenticity and potentially cut 80–90% of the described authentication process. He connects this approach to the broader challenge of litigation involving large volumes of digital evidence and difficult authenticity assessments.

Jacoutot says AI has been used to alter evidence in litigation, including in a case dismissed with prejudice, and warns that excessive AI-assisted filings could clutter court dockets. He also describes digital discovery as burdensome because parties may need to review enormous volumes of documents and assess whether digital evidence is authentic.