24 ms·

As mentioned in the article they are in talks to buy Magnus's app Play Magnus. That being said, if they have literal screenshots of the discussions between Nie

As mentioned in the article they are in talks to buy Magnus's app Play Magnus. That being said, if they have literal screenshots of the discussions between Niemann and chess.com admitting to cheating and appealing the ban, those seem like smoking guns in addition to all this other analysis

hollerith 4y ago
>if they have literal screenshots of the discussions between Niemann and chess.com admitting to cheating Screenshots are easy enough to fake perfectly that if I didn't trust a party to give an honest summary of the discussion and (as in the current stake) thousands of dollars or more is at stake, then I wouldn't trust screenshots either.
- ratg13 4y ago
  If you are one of the parties in the conversation, then it stands to reason that you have more than screenshots.
- edanm 4y ago
  Screenshots in this case are perfectly reliable. If they are literally faking screenshots of what Hans said, it'd be incredibly easy for him to prove it and sue them for the falsification.
  - hollerith 4y ago
    Can you explain how Hans could prove that screenshots are fake? I suppose you mean Hans could subpoena records from his own ISP or Chess.com or Chess.com's ISP that reveal the content of Hans's communication; right?
    - edanm 4y ago
      Exactly. He can subpoena records, can have a third party get access to e.g. Gmail or whatever he uses, etc.
      - hollerith 4y ago
        He can subpoena records if he files a lawsuit, convinces a judge that the lawsuit shouldn't be immediately dismissed and survives arguments by opposing counsel that the records should be protected from the discovery process. I.e., not "incredibly easy", as you say. Also, ISPs usually claim in response to subpoenas that they do not retain the bodies of emails and other "contents" of communications I gather. Also, Hans (initially) didn't want chess.com to be able to publish the communications, so he might've avoided using gmail in favor of some method that is guaranteed not to leave a verifiable record.

hollerith 4y ago

>if they have literal screenshots of the discussions between Niemann and chess.com admitting to cheating Screenshots are easy enough to fake perfectly that if I didn't trust a party to give an honest summary of the discussion and (as in the current stake) thousands of dollars or more is at stake, then I wouldn't trust screenshots either.

ratg13 4y ago
If you are one of the parties in the conversation, then it stands to reason that you have more than screenshots.
edanm 4y ago
Screenshots in this case are perfectly reliable. If they are literally faking screenshots of what Hans said, it'd be incredibly easy for him to prove it and sue them for the falsification.
- hollerith 4y ago
  Can you explain how Hans could prove that screenshots are fake? I suppose you mean Hans could subpoena records from his own ISP or Chess.com or Chess.com's ISP that reveal the content of Hans's communication; right?
  - edanm 4y ago
    Exactly. He can subpoena records, can have a third party get access to e.g. Gmail or whatever he uses, etc.
    - hollerith 4y ago
      He can subpoena records if he files a lawsuit, convinces a judge that the lawsuit shouldn't be immediately dismissed and survives arguments by opposing counsel that the records should be protected from the discovery process. I.e., not "incredibly easy", as you say. Also, ISPs usually claim in response to subpoenas that they do not retain the bodies of emails and other "contents" of communications I gather. Also, Hans (initially) didn't want chess.com to be able to publish the communications, so he might've avoided using gmail in favor of some method that is guaranteed not to leave a verifiable record.