6 ms·

> And obviously evidence was provided for none of this. what kind of evidence would you expect to see if it was true?

loopz 6y ago
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is just hijacking criticism of authority, to start an authoritarian cult of lies, bullying and manipulation.
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago
  again, "what evidence would you expect to see?" Also, I hardly think that the notion that people conspired to cheat an election is extraordinary. Rather it would be extraordinary if they did not. Also as regards the suspension of belief necessary to consider elections overseas to be corrupt but not in this bastion of freedom and democracy, the good ol' U.S.A.
  - klyrs 6y ago
    There have been quite a few lawsuits about the alleged conspiracies to cheat the election. Most of them have been thrown out for lack of evidence. But yeah, conspiracy to cheat the election has occurred in the last few days. Thankfully, those efforts have failed spectacularly. https://abcnews.go.com/US/wayne-county-republican-canvassers-rescind-votes-certifying-election/story?id=74290114 https://abcnews.go.com/US/wayne-county-republican-canvassers...
    - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
      > But yeah, conspiracy to cheat the election has occurred in the last few days. Thankfully, those efforts have failed spectacularly. uncharitably, this would be an extraordinary claim. Fortunately I'm not under the impression that election fraud never happens, so I can use normal standards of evidence for this. And it does appear that some chicanery is afoot, considering those members changed their vote after being pressured and possibly having their families threatened: https://twitter.com/kylenabecker/status/1329090338984583168 https://twitter.com/kylenabecker/status/1329090338984583168
newacct583 6y ago
An exploit demo? An incriminating email? Testimony from Chavez's ghost? Hell, I'd take a suspicious correlation between firmware version and vote count, even. I'm not picky. But that's the problem, isn't it? You want the standard of evidence for reporting an allegation (e.g. "the election was stolen") to place the burden of proof on the listener ("Well, you can't prove the election was NOT stolen, can you?"). And that's pretty much the definition of "fake news". It's a lie. And they tell the lie because they know you'll believe it. And that's the problem. Not "information overload".
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago
  > An exploit demo? Been done, pentesters have been crying about this for years. > An incriminating email? After the compromise of the Clinton email server I think they learned their lesson there. > Hell, I'd take a suspicious correlation between firmware version and vote count, even. I'm not picky. Theres been some technical arguments but they require some expertise to evaluate and probably aren't suited for a presser. > But that's the problem, isn't it? You want the standard of evidence for reporting an allegation (e.g. "the election was stolen") to place the burden of proof on the listener ("Well, you can't prove the election was NOT stolen, can you?"). its a bit ironic that you can ignore existing evidence in favor of a contrary belief but claim the other side isn't presenting evidence. > And that's pretty much the definition of "fake news". It's a lie. And they tell the lie because they know you'll believe it. And that's the problem. Not "information overload". Oh I don't believe shit. its just odd that people are so insistent that this election was all on the up and up with no evidence whereas they aren't even willing to consider that someone might cheat in an election because "that would leave evidence and I haven't seen any"
  - newacct583 6y ago
    Link to a verified pentest report on the Dominion machines they're talking about that shows this kind of thing is possible? Genuinely curious. I promise I'm not ignoring evidence, I literally haven't seen it. Edit: and in the other direction, any input on why the non-machine hand count which just completed in Georgia affirmed the results from the original count? Doesn't that pretty much eliminate the whole conspiracy theory?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is just hijacking criticism of authority, to start an authoritarian cult of lies, bullying and manipulation.

chordalkeyboard 6y ago
again, "what evidence would you expect to see?" Also, I hardly think that the notion that people conspired to cheat an election is extraordinary. Rather it would be extraordinary if they did not. Also as regards the suspension of belief necessary to consider elections overseas to be corrupt but not in this bastion of freedom and democracy, the good ol' U.S.A.
- klyrs 6y ago
  There have been quite a few lawsuits about the alleged conspiracies to cheat the election. Most of them have been thrown out for lack of evidence. But yeah, conspiracy to cheat the election has occurred in the last few days. Thankfully, those efforts have failed spectacularly. https://abcnews.go.com/US/wayne-county-republican-canvassers-rescind-votes-certifying-election/story?id=74290114 https://abcnews.go.com/US/wayne-county-republican-canvassers...
  - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
    > But yeah, conspiracy to cheat the election has occurred in the last few days. Thankfully, those efforts have failed spectacularly. uncharitably, this would be an extraordinary claim. Fortunately I'm not under the impression that election fraud never happens, so I can use normal standards of evidence for this. And it does appear that some chicanery is afoot, considering those members changed their vote after being pressured and possibly having their families threatened: https://twitter.com/kylenabecker/status/1329090338984583168 https://twitter.com/kylenabecker/status/1329090338984583168

newacct583 6y ago

An exploit demo? An incriminating email? Testimony from Chavez's ghost? Hell, I'd take a suspicious correlation between firmware version and vote count, even. I'm not picky. But that's the problem, isn't it? You want the standard of evidence for reporting an allegation (e.g. "the election was stolen") to place the burden of proof on the listener ("Well, you can't prove the election was NOT stolen, can you?"). And that's pretty much the definition of "fake news". It's a lie. And they tell the lie because they know you'll believe it. And that's the problem. Not "information overload".

chordalkeyboard 6y ago
> An exploit demo? Been done, pentesters have been crying about this for years. > An incriminating email? After the compromise of the Clinton email server I think they learned their lesson there. > Hell, I'd take a suspicious correlation between firmware version and vote count, even. I'm not picky. Theres been some technical arguments but they require some expertise to evaluate and probably aren't suited for a presser. > But that's the problem, isn't it? You want the standard of evidence for reporting an allegation (e.g. "the election was stolen") to place the burden of proof on the listener ("Well, you can't prove the election was NOT stolen, can you?"). its a bit ironic that you can ignore existing evidence in favor of a contrary belief but claim the other side isn't presenting evidence. > And that's pretty much the definition of "fake news". It's a lie. And they tell the lie because they know you'll believe it. And that's the problem. Not "information overload". Oh I don't believe shit. its just odd that people are so insistent that this election was all on the up and up with no evidence whereas they aren't even willing to consider that someone might cheat in an election because "that would leave evidence and I haven't seen any"
- newacct583 6y ago
  Link to a verified pentest report on the Dominion machines they're talking about that shows this kind of thing is possible? Genuinely curious. I promise I'm not ignoring evidence, I literally haven't seen it. Edit: and in the other direction, any input on why the non-machine hand count which just completed in Georgia affirmed the results from the original count? Doesn't that pretty much eliminate the whole conspiracy theory?