HaroldBolt78

I like to think his point was that it would refuse if any other race was targeted.

"I'm afraid I can't do that. Using a group's ethnic identity for humour is problematic..."

Saving millions from nuclear devastation is beyond its capabilities but, as a reflection of modern society, there is no situation where loxism is too far.

Are you Jewish, by chance?

In question was whether or not they are "docile" about it.

Sure they believed it, but that doesn't mean they were violent or dangerous. There weren't going to be any politicians dangling from lightposts that day. Left alone for long enough, they would've eventually got bored and gone home.

Far worse things were said of Trump every day on Twitter throughout his presidency (and beyond), I don't think empty threats from the frustrated and powerless are anything to be taken seriously.

All of this hasn't stopped the US Gestapo locking up political opponents for decades as a result of Jan 6th, even those who didn't even attend. So it was a very useful day for one side. It makes even more sense when you consider that they refuse to release video evidence from the day because of how many feds' covers they'd blow.

Even January 6th was fairly docile. Nobody there seems to have had any genuine desire for violence, except the feds who were only too eager to open fire at the earliest excuse. When I think of January 6th, I imagine pictures of people laughing as they sit in chairs they're not allowed to sit on, smiling as they're waving flags in foyers they're not supposed to be in, and a trigger happy fed executing that woman whose name escapes me right now.

Put it this way: I'd much much much prefer January 6thers came through my town than BLM.

That's not going to happen, though.

Population growth will continue whether you're having children or not. Western economies are Ponzi schemes and the ones needing your votes know it. You may not have any kids, but there are millions of Africans, Indians, and Chinese ready and willing to flood your country, and there are politicians only too eager to see them pouring across undefended borders. Some of these countries are seeing 9+ births per woman; there will be no shortage of new people to replace your non-existent grandchildren.

The solution would require some degree of ethnonationalism, else how do you argue against this policy? From a "we are all the same" viewpoint, it is unremarkable if Canada is 100% ethnically Indian and Chinese in 200 years; if Britain and Australia are African colonies; if America is... American. The very thought of racial discrimination in immigration, however, is totally unpalatable and unconscionable to most Westerners, and thus there is still no solution.

Your descendants' positions will be filled. There is no depopulation fantasy in the West's future. There can only be replacement.

I had the power turned off at home about a year ago. I think it was due to maintenance by the utilities company, or maybe I did it for DIY reasons.

Anyway, after it came back on, it took me far too long to realise why my internet was down. All DNS responses were being rejected. It turns out, my Pi-Hole DNS server - which had forgotten the time, of course - was trying to resolve the IP of an NTP server so it could fetch the current time, but this name resolution was over DNSSEC which requires the current time. You need the time to get the time.

I turned off DNSSEC and haven't looked back since.

He must've really screwed up the wording of the challenge then, if a lawyer was able to successfully argue that "(deliberately) too hard to disprove" meets the criteria for "disprove".

How could I forget the file modification dates! Unbelievable that that held up in court.

Why didn't the defence get an expert in to show how easy it is to change dates? Why not demonstrate copying the data to a new file and saving it, hence modifying the date? Or even re-saving it and having the software automatically change the modification date due to some hidden encoding or formatting setting?

Since when does a modification date count for anything!? There are countless reasons why it might not line up, both nefarious and perfectly innocent. And even if nefarious, it doesn't disprove the claims or invalidate the data, it only proves that the competition is rigged.

This sounds terribly amateurish, and even unfair.

I have a hard time believing that the 40-50 other software forensics experts didn't recognise ASCII in hex, or bother converting these files even if they didn't.

If I understand correctly, he only analysed a tiny proportion of the data. Junk or not, it doesn't disprove that the remaining majority held key evidence.

He "determined that nothing in the file was related to the 2020 presidential election". What is "determined" here?

It sounds like this was more of a gaming of the system than it was a forensic investigation. There must be an awful lot missing here.