6 ms·

Sorry you’re interpreting the release of these documents as evidence that the conspiracists were right? If the conspiracy was correct, these would never be made

Sorry you’re interpreting the release of these documents as evidence that the conspiracists were right? If the conspiracy was correct, these would never be made public, not “they would be made public in a pretty reasonable span of time for our abysmally slow justice system,” which appears to be what’s happening. People filed a legal request to keep them private, that request has been overruled. What’s the conspiracy?

simplotek 4y ago
> What’s the conspiracy? Don't underestimate the ability of these conspiracy loons to fabricate more and more stories. I expect them to react to tasting a big nothing sandwich with more conspiracy theories on how shady imaginary organizations edited out all the smoking guns.
snapcaster 4y ago
The conspiracy i'm referring to was the whole overall scheme, not specifically this this article
- threatofrain 4y ago
  I think the public at large believes Epstein met with powerful people and trafficked with human sex slaves. The conspiracy narrative is about how Epstein died and whether there’s a powerful guilty people can basically control the justice system.
  - snapcaster 4y ago
    Right, _now_ they believe that. This is my whole point! Previously if you said that a powerful man who became a finance billionaire with nobody in industry knowing him had a secret island where he hosted presidents, royalty, billionaires, intellectuals and they did drugs and raped kids those same people would have dismissed it as "conspiracy theory"
    - anonymouse008 4y ago
      There's a new possibility that many of these 'crazy' conspiracies are intentional misdirections. Elon is king of this, as learned through his press releases with Tesla. One could almost back-test many of the crazy, stupid ideas, like the pizza parlor and now this most recent Balagencia deal, as all misdirections for what actually takes place.
    - ethanbond 4y ago
      I think what you’re describing is people being skeptical of claims without evidence and then being convinced of those claims by evidence. I don’t think that’s a bad thing. Edit: Just to be crystal clear given that surely there was some evidence of his misdeeds prior to the recent blow up (e.g. his Florida arrest and subsequent soft handling by Acosta etc.), what you're seeing is a rough correlation between the % of people who believe a claim and the volume/credibility of the evidence in support of that claim. So yeah, when there was little evidence few people believed it. Now that there's a lot, everyone takes it as fact. The only thing shocking here is how utterly reasonable it is.
    - notahacker 4y ago
      Now they believe that because some victims came forward and didn't get dismissed, and the mainstream media reported on it. The possibility that claims about Epstein might have been laughed at if the story had been broken by people who normally focus on talking about crisis actors and chemtrails but those people didn't break the story because they didn't know anything about it (and were too busy talking about crisis actors and chemtrails) isn't a particularly good argument for taking that group more seriously
      - mistermann 4y ago
        > Now they believe that because some victims came forward and didn't get dismissed, and the mainstream media reported on it. https://ml4a.github.io/ml4a/how_neural_networks_are_trained/ https://ml4a.github.io/ml4a/how_neural_networks_are_trained/ > The possibility that claims about Epstein might have been laughed at if the story had been broken by people who normally focus on talking about crisis actors and chemtrails but those people didn't break the story because they didn't know anything about it (and were too busy talking about crisis actors and chemtrails) isn't a particularly good argument for taking that group more seriously https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heuristic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heuristic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Na%C3%AFve_realism_(psychology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Na%C3%AFve_realism_(psychology...
beavisthegenius 4y ago
helloworld11 4y ago
>Sorry you’re interpreting the release of these documents as evidence that the conspiracists were right? If the conspiracy was correct, these would never be made public, Just because a conspiracy has sprung leaks or failed in some vital aspect doesn't need to mean it never existed. Your argument is based on a very unusual definition of a conspiracy as a secret plot that's guaranteed to be all-powerful at information and damage control.
- ethanbond 4y ago
  At least the conspiracy that I've been seeing has to do with the justice system behaving in an abnormal way with regard to these records. This seems like evidence that it's not behaving in an abnormal way.

simplotek 4y ago

> What’s the conspiracy? Don't underestimate the ability of these conspiracy loons to fabricate more and more stories. I expect them to react to tasting a big nothing sandwich with more conspiracy theories on how shady imaginary organizations edited out all the smoking guns.

snapcaster 4y ago

The conspiracy i'm referring to was the whole overall scheme, not specifically this this article

threatofrain 4y ago
I think the public at large believes Epstein met with powerful people and trafficked with human sex slaves. The conspiracy narrative is about how Epstein died and whether there’s a powerful guilty people can basically control the justice system.
- snapcaster 4y ago
  Right, _now_ they believe that. This is my whole point! Previously if you said that a powerful man who became a finance billionaire with nobody in industry knowing him had a secret island where he hosted presidents, royalty, billionaires, intellectuals and they did drugs and raped kids those same people would have dismissed it as "conspiracy theory"
  - anonymouse008 4y ago
    There's a new possibility that many of these 'crazy' conspiracies are intentional misdirections. Elon is king of this, as learned through his press releases with Tesla. One could almost back-test many of the crazy, stupid ideas, like the pizza parlor and now this most recent Balagencia deal, as all misdirections for what actually takes place.
  - ethanbond 4y ago
    I think what you’re describing is people being skeptical of claims without evidence and then being convinced of those claims by evidence. I don’t think that’s a bad thing. Edit: Just to be crystal clear given that surely there was some evidence of his misdeeds prior to the recent blow up (e.g. his Florida arrest and subsequent soft handling by Acosta etc.), what you're seeing is a rough correlation between the % of people who believe a claim and the volume/credibility of the evidence in support of that claim. So yeah, when there was little evidence few people believed it. Now that there's a lot, everyone takes it as fact. The only thing shocking here is how utterly reasonable it is.
  - notahacker 4y ago
    Now they believe that because some victims came forward and didn't get dismissed, and the mainstream media reported on it. The possibility that claims about Epstein might have been laughed at if the story had been broken by people who normally focus on talking about crisis actors and chemtrails but those people didn't break the story because they didn't know anything about it (and were too busy talking about crisis actors and chemtrails) isn't a particularly good argument for taking that group more seriously
    - mistermann 4y ago
      > Now they believe that because some victims came forward and didn't get dismissed, and the mainstream media reported on it. https://ml4a.github.io/ml4a/how_neural_networks_are_trained/ https://ml4a.github.io/ml4a/how_neural_networks_are_trained/ > The possibility that claims about Epstein might have been laughed at if the story had been broken by people who normally focus on talking about crisis actors and chemtrails but those people didn't break the story because they didn't know anything about it (and were too busy talking about crisis actors and chemtrails) isn't a particularly good argument for taking that group more seriously https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heuristic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heuristic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Na%C3%AFve_realism_(psychology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Na%C3%AFve_realism_(psychology...

beavisthegenius 4y ago

helloworld11 4y ago

>Sorry you’re interpreting the release of these documents as evidence that the conspiracists were right? If the conspiracy was correct, these would never be made public, Just because a conspiracy has sprung leaks or failed in some vital aspect doesn't need to mean it never existed. Your argument is based on a very unusual definition of a conspiracy as a secret plot that's guaranteed to be all-powerful at information and damage control.

ethanbond 4y ago
At least the conspiracy that I've been seeing has to do with the justice system behaving in an abnormal way with regard to these records. This seems like evidence that it's not behaving in an abnormal way.