3 ms·
"The appearance of X's name in the files does not imply wrongdoing"
E.g. at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9ykjlyv50o
Anyone else uncomfortable with this new BBC boilerplate?
The reporter cannot know. Might be wrong. Possibly the appearence does.
Clearly his goal is to disclaim accusation.
But why not stick with e.g. "does not necessarily indicate wrongdoing"?.
- davydm 9mo agobecause these files contain a lot of arbitrary garbage, including unsent emails for instance, you will find Stephen Colbert's name in there - because an email sent between two of epstein's buddies included a line where the author thought that epstein would enjoy Colbert's show so his name is in the files, and he really has nothing to do with it - and I bet there's a lot more, considering the sources of the files
- davydm 9mo agonot saying that all the names in that file are innocent - just saying that having your name appear in the file doesn't make you a pedophile - otherwise we should watch out for Forrest Gump and Pikachu too. Their names also appear in the files.
- chrisjj 9mo agoMake you one?! I had no idea current tech was so powerful. Then again, seeing the latest 3D printers... Who knows what that text in a prompt injection could deliver. /i
- chrisjj 9mo agoI cannot imagine the BBC would bother to disclaim for such cases.
- robthebrew 9mo agoIf you are going to redact the name, could you use the same number of letters? eg XXXXp
- chrisjj 9mo agoGiven the purpose, I've increased the difference. Apologies if my purpose was not clear.