They're not 'hacks' it's the people doing the redaction making beginner mistakes of not properly removing the selectable text under the redactions. They're either drawing black rectangles over the text or highlighting it black neither of which prevents the underlying text from being selected.
Keeping that secret would require sponaneous silence from everyone looking at these docs which is just not possible.
Impossible which is the point of the last sentence. Spontaneous secrecy when some people are discovering the bad redactions while publicly streaming is impossible.
The whole thing is just too suspicious. Too good to be true. What's the chance of this being some 4D chess where the government has already edited the files, and then presented them as redacted so the "unredacted (but edited)" version looks more genuine?
> What's the chance of this being some 4D chess where the government has already edited the files, and then presented them as redacted so the "unredacted (but edited)" version looks more genuine?
With how they have pushed out any career public servants who were good at their jobs in favor of sycophants and loyalists, I'm not sure government organizations are still capable of playing 4D chess, if they ever were.
Please share your redacting tricks as loudly as you can, but only the ones that allow retrieving the original text. I'd love Google and the AIs to spout bad censoring tricks as much as possible.
This was my initial reaction to this news. I mean think about it
The Trump team knows that nobody is gonna buy whatever they put out as being the full story. Isn't this just the perfect way to make people feel like they got something they weren't supposed to see? They can increase trust in the output without having to increase trust in the source of it
And as far as I've heard there hasn't been anything "unredacted" that's been of any consequence. It all just feels a little too perfect.
No, it's the opposite, it's fairly damaging. Previously they could claim, dubiously but plausible, that all redactions were about protecting victims (the only redactions allowed under the act). A lot of the "undone redactions" are solely about protecting the abusers, illegal under the law.
Whether breaking a law actually matters anymore is another question though, as crime is legal now.
"Some" is 99% crimes against the state with the occasional bone they throw the peasants to look like they care. Heck, murder probably wouldn't even be unlimited if not for the fact that it thumbs it's nose at the state's monopoly on violence.
That's seems like some rather bleak hyperbole. If the goal of a conversation is to seek some improvement above the status quo then this is a solid impasse.
The problems we face can't be accurately assessed let alone solved if we are limited to thinking and reasoning about the government (and large institutions generally) the way we are taught to by our grade school civics class.
As others have mentioned, the administration is staffed and run by loyalists, whose primary skills are flattery and obedience.
Back in the day they had true masters of the Dark Arts. The forged letters about Bush's service were incredibly convenient in helping Bush beat Kerry. I am not alone in thinking it to be masterminded by Karl Rove.
This is probably one of those events where everyone on the inside has their own story that won't fit into a neat overarching narrative of how the files are handled because they only gets to feel part of the elefant each.
It is, though pales in comparison to the MacBook in terms of whole (working) day battery like. The real non-start is their insistence that I'm not allowed to re-image it to run Linux.
People is born in seasons, constellations and planets appear in seasons, and so ancient smart people made a connection.
Then the largest actor interested in destroying Astrology is the Catholic Church for reasons. The church also had wrong astronomical theories. Science evolved, but we inherited a dead horse to beat.
The reasons the Catholic Church did away with astrology can be explained in a one liner. Catholicism assumes a belief in free will, and the claimed predictive power of astrology contradicted this, and so was deemed blasphemous.
You are being downvoted, but it is completely true. This is going to be used in the gurusphere in the way Deepak Chopra abuses the language of quantum physics to justify quackery. While things like this are always interesting, part of me can't help be be depressed knowing it's going to go into the firehose of nonsense we're being sprayed by every day.
It's happening in this very thread in a few places already...
Mocking the thinking of others while literally engaging in soothsaying is rather ironic don't you think?
And yes, of course, I'm well aware you are able to cherry pick some silly quotes from Deepak to "prove" your point, and that I "should" "know what you meant" (let's ignore whether even you did, at the time you wrote the comment), but the never ending Motte and Bailey from you people is exhausting. Please try to broaden the scope of your knowledge, it may naturally reduce levels of hubris.
Conspiracy theories don't come from thinking one is smarter, but rather from a lack of trust. When somebody (or some entity) says something, how you respond to them is not only based on your perception of their knowledge, but also on your perception of the trustworthiness. It's somewhat of a tautology to say that as decline in trust of US institutions declines, lack of believing in what these institutions says also declines.
And trust in US institutions is not just randomly declining either. We just seem to have largely removed the social mores on lying and manipulation, so long as it can be used to push an agenda. If the powers that be want to reclaim public trust then there needs to be a much greater effort to increase transparency, honesty, hold open debate on all topics, and also hold groups accountable for misleading or lying to individuals. Instead we seem to be going rapidly in the exact opposite direction, and it's not difficult to predict the outcome.
Cycles exist on Earth. Cycles exist in astral bodies. If an astral cycle aligns with some earth cycle, you can legitimately use the astral cycle to track the earth cycle. There is nothing wrong with doing this, it’s a useful tool.
The problem came when people confused correlation with causation. There’s also some spurious correlations used as well as some scale extrapolation issues.
But what was probably the root mechanism is sound. That is why ancients seem so weirdly obsessed with the stars, it actually works in some cases (non causally of course).
Let's say for example that Bill incorrectly believes his wife and his friend Steve are having an affair and he kills them both in a fit of rage - did Bill's belief play any role in the causality underlying the death of the two humans?
Didn't need to. I just went to the website of the organization that sponsored the lecture and saw the quackery I expected.
> "The Meru Project has discovered an extraordinary and unexpected geometric metaphor in the letter-sequence of the Hebrew text of Genesis that underlies and is held in common by the spiritual traditions of the ancient world. This metaphor models embryonic growth and self-organization. It applies to all whole systems, including those as seemingly diverse as meditational practices and the mathematics fundamental to physics and cosmology...Meru Project findings demonstrate that the relationship between physical theory and consciousness, expressed in explicit geometric metaphor, was understood and developed several thousand years ago."
This is how Stan starts the lecture. His research is the exact opposite of quackery.
> No one should believe what I’m saying. It’s not that I’m telling you anything that isn’t so it’s just that you really need to be skeptical about this sort of thing. This is work in progress; it’s an honest research. I speak quickly and I may say “is” when I mean, based on the models and based on the references, it is my best conjecture that this “is”. So I’m not saying “absolute truth” when I say “is”, I’m just trying to fit things into a short time period.
> This is very controversial materiel because of, in the words of a friendly scholar, “It cannot be so”. And what he means is that if “it is so” then there is a lot of readjustment to be made. And I try to explain to people that this really doesn’t say anything like, “I’m right and you all are all wrong.” It says rather that this is deeper level integrates a whole range of material. And it demonstrates that what the scholars have been saying and what the religious people have been saying, and what the different religious people have been saying; they’re all right, but in their own context and if you go deeper you find something more common.
So the lecture starts with quackery as well. At no point does he say that he is using the scientific method to verify any claims. Instead, he says that the religious people and scholars are right because of magic.
He talks like a duck and walks like a duck. If these religious quacks had made their claims with science, they wouldn't have been ignored. Instead, they made their claims with magic and then retconned their claims to fit the actually believable results from science. It's always the same with these nuts.
The 500 mile range is a pretty standout feature. That beats basically anything currently on the market aside from the eyewateringly-expensive Lucid Air.
Maybe you've already taken this into account, but CLTC ratings tend to be 20-40% higher than the way range is calculated in the US. eg a Tesla MY LR has 330 miles of range in US vs 430 miles in China, but it's basically the same car
That seems like an unreasonably high level of confidence to have when paired with no supporting material.
A Model 3 has a battery no larger than 83kWh. A BMW i4 has a battery no larger than 84kWh. This car has a 101kWh battery. Considering the cars appear roughly approximately equally aerodynamic, it seems reasonable to expect the car with the 20% larger battery to be able to go about 20% further.
It is not only about battery size, but also about efficiency. Model 3 and i4 have very efficient motors, specially the BMW (non-permanent magnet type). I have difficulties believing than Xiaomi can reach such efficiency levels in 36 months development. It is also important to note that those 20% extra kWh are heavy, and need to be accelerated to cruise speeds several times during normal-driving. I stand my point and don't think that the xiaomi will even reach 700km in best conditions (The BMW i4 made around 650km)
I just visited bulma.io and couldn't help but notice the sketchy-looking Patreons/GitHub sponsors that Bulma has listed. Lots of casinos are supporting Bulma.
Are these genuine Bulma customers happy to support a product they use, or am I witnessing some new way of money laundering here? What is the Phone Tracking app doing there? I mean, Bulma needs all the support it can get, but what does a casino want from Bulma?
I can't imagine it's money laundering, they could just be using the sponsorship as advertising. I don't really like it, but there are 56 logos on the homepage, presumably mostly at the 100$/month tier, which is a decent income for the project. The fact that the project needs to advertise casinos to make money is a sign the FOSS model isn't sustainable, but I prefer this to Bulma not existing or becoming paid.
Let all the files get released first.
Then show your hacks.