Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 
834 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 260

Trusted

  Reply # 1112171 20-Aug-2014 15:46
One person supports this post
Send private message

Geektastic:

So does that mean there is no actual technological proof the words are genuine?


Dude you're tossing around concepts like "proof", "facts", "evidence" with some anonymous dude on a forum who refuses to substantiate any claim he makes.

The chain of custody is hopelessly compromised for all the material taken from Slater.  There's no way of determining whether the material has been altered.  It's passed through an unknown number of systems.  There's nothing released so far that would indicate the hacker(s) are NZers, and not a foreign agency.  

The material is being drip test feed in a way that will encourage people to stop taking care about what they download.  Just one PDF containing an exploit could compromise a huge number of high value targets.

2474 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 884

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1112173 20-Aug-2014 15:50
2 people support this post
Send private message

Geektastic: Personally I think the onus of proof rests with the accusers in a matter like this. If it's the other way around, if I write a piece claiming David Cunliffe is, say, dying of a terminal illness and he decides to not dignify such nonsense with a reply, we can assume I am correct...!


But John Key has already confirmed they are legit. Which part of that are you missing??

"Collins was *unwise* to email the details"

Let's keep on denying it even after the PM has confirmed it.... lalalalalalala I'm not listening to you.. you must be wrong.





 
 
 
 


12134 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3947

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1112175 20-Aug-2014 15:51
Send private message

Glassboy:
Geektastic:

So does that mean there is no actual technological proof the words are genuine?


Dude you're tossing around concepts like "proof", "facts", "evidence" with some anonymous dude on a forum who refuses to substantiate any claim he makes.

The chain of custody is hopelessly compromised for all the material taken from Slater.  There's no way of determining whether the material has been altered.  It's passed through an unknown number of systems.  There's nothing released so far that would indicate the hacker(s) are NZers, and not a foreign agency.  

The material is being drip test feed in a way that will encourage people to stop taking care about what they download.  Just one PDF containing an exploit could compromise a huge number of high value targets.


Well, that is more or less what I was thinking tbh but, as I said, I am no IT geek so I just wanted to be sure that I just hadn't recognised something there that amounted to proof.

So essentially it's just hearsay and nonsense with no more proof of veracity than Lord Of The Rings? Wow. Sure wish I had read that book now....!! ;-)





3165 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 784


  Reply # 1112201 20-Aug-2014 16:18
One person supports this post
Send private message

Geektastic:
Glassboy:
Geektastic:

So does that mean there is no actual technological proof the words are genuine?


Dude you're tossing around concepts like "proof", "facts", "evidence" with some anonymous dude on a forum who refuses to substantiate any claim he makes.

The chain of custody is hopelessly compromised for all the material taken from Slater.  There's no way of determining whether the material has been altered.  It's passed through an unknown number of systems.  There's nothing released so far that would indicate the hacker(s) are NZers, and not a foreign agency.  

The material is being drip test feed in a way that will encourage people to stop taking care about what they download.  Just one PDF containing an exploit could compromise a huge number of high value targets.


Well, that is more or less what I was thinking tbh but, as I said, I am no IT geek so I just wanted to be sure that I just hadn't recognised something there that amounted to proof.

So essentially it's just hearsay and nonsense with no more proof of veracity than Lord Of The Rings? Wow. Sure wish I had read that book now....!! ;-)


I assume, in addition to not being an "IT geek", you're also not a holder of a degree in logic??!!

I think you're jumping many steps to go from the (current) lack of proof of its provenence to the conclusion "it's just hearsay and nonsense". In the absence of definitive proof, as mentioned above there are now acknowledgements that certain things did happen (eg Collins releasing the details of the DIA official). Unless you're going to argue all the material is completely manufactured (probably a claim many believing in the 'left-wing conspiracy theory' theory may buy!), your conclusion isn't tenable.

834 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 260

Trusted

  Reply # 1112204 20-Aug-2014 16:27
One person supports this post
Send private message

jonathan18: 

I think you're jumping many steps to go from the (current) lack of proof of its provenence to the conclusion "it's just hearsay and nonsense". In the absence of definitive proof, as mentioned above there are now acknowledgements that certain things did happen (eg Collins releasing the details of the DIA official). Unless you're going to argue all the material is completely manufactured (probably a claim many believing in the 'left-wing conspiracy theory' theory may buy!), your conclusion isn't tenable.


There's corroboration of one claim, and the position on one other is that it was already in the public domain and is being misrepresented.  If you're saying that logically makes all the other claims true, then here's a poster for you https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/poster.

2474 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 884

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1112223 20-Aug-2014 16:46
One person supports this post
Send private message

Glassboy:
jonathan18: 

I think you're jumping many steps to go from the (current) lack of proof of its provenence to the conclusion "it's just hearsay and nonsense". In the absence of definitive proof, as mentioned above there are now acknowledgements that certain things did happen (eg Collins releasing the details of the DIA official). Unless you're going to argue all the material is completely manufactured (probably a claim many believing in the 'left-wing conspiracy theory' theory may buy!), your conclusion isn't tenable.


There's corroboration of one claim, and the position on one other is that it was already in the public domain and is being misrepresented.  If you're saying that logically makes all the other claims true, then here's a poster for you https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/poster.


And going by that logic, the further things that are confirmed by the PM one by one is only just one more thing that may have been right. The rest of it is a large body of lies.

I wonder when the shoe was on the other foot when Hagers book on Corngate came out if you would be having the same approach that the book was all lies. Somehow I don't think so.





834 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 260

Trusted

  Reply # 1112227 20-Aug-2014 16:48
Send private message

BarTender: 

And going by that logic, the further things that are confirmed by the PM one by one is only just one more thing that may have been right. The rest of it is a large body of lies.



Can you explain what you're saying.  What you wrote doesn't parse well.

2474 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 884

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1112270 20-Aug-2014 17:46
One person supports this post
Send private message

Glassboy:
BarTender: 
And going by that logic, the further things that are confirmed by the PM one by one is only just one more thing that may have been right. The rest of it is a large body of lies.

Can you explain what you're saying.  What you wrote doesn't parse well.


Just wondering how many more things are going to be released until you start to ask questions.

I think the main issue is as much as National are throwing everything to discredit Hager. But how come no one has gone to the court to have an interim injunction to prevent further books being printed and sold if the book was so factually incorrect. The lawyers would be all over Hager like a rash.

Where is the injunction?

All that has happened so far is people have confirmed what was printed and Hager admited he got it wrong in regards to the prisoner move. That's the only part that has been called out as wrong.





834 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 260

Trusted

  Reply # 1112276 20-Aug-2014 17:57
One person supports this post
Send private message

BarTender:
Glassboy:
BarTender: 
And going by that logic, the further things that are confirmed by the PM one by one is only just one more thing that may have been right. The rest of it is a large body of lies.

Can you explain what you're saying.  What you wrote doesn't parse well.


Just wondering how many more things are going to be released until you start to ask questions.


Asking questions is not ranting anonymously on a forum.


I think the main issue is as much as National are throwing everything to discredit Hager. But how come no one has gone to the court to have an interim injunction to prevent further books being printed and sold if the book was so factually incorrect. The lawyers would be all over Hager like a rash.

Where is the injunction?


Well that's obvious, it was bought in secret to prevent injunctions.  Anyone seeking an injunction now would be seen as giving it credibility.  Why do you think an injunction is any great sign of accuracy or inaccuracy?


All that has happened so far is people have confirmed what was printed and Hager admited it got it wrong in regards to the prisoner move. That's the only part that has been called out as wrong.


One person has confirmed one thing.  Rodney Hide and two solicitors named in the book have said the details about them are wrong  There's probably more.  It's been on the radio and in newspapers.

18716 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5358

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1112563 21-Aug-2014 08:02
One person supports this post
Send private message

jonathan18:
networkn:
Geektastic: I saw one interesting comment about the Labour website 'hack' in a newspaper comments forum.

To precis: If they cannot even run a small political party website without concerning themselves about the security of it, would you want them in charge of government IT and all it entails?


HAHA yah ain't that the truth. To be fair even some of the most die hard Labour supporters I know,  right now, feel that Labour wouldn't be capable of running the country properly. 


HAHA nah that ain't the truth - yet again it's opinion masquerading as "truth" from two people that still can't manage to separate out their politics from any part of this topic.

Neither the Government nor the political parties that form that Government are expected to be experts in all areas - that's why they have Government departments that deliver specialised services, are responsible for employing such experts, and provide advice to Ministers.



HAHA are you seriously suggesting this isn't political? That would be why it was released so close to an election and is clearly attempting to smear only one side. 


18716 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5358

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1112565 21-Aug-2014 08:03
One person supports this post
Send private message

Geektastic:
BarTender:
Geektastic:
BarTender:
Geektastic:
BarTender: https://twitter.com/whaledump/status/501911653316050945

Oh dear.


I've never claimed to be an IT expert, but just looking at that, what is there there to prove it wasn't just written using Word one evening after a few beers? 

(Note - this is a genuine question. The text I can see looks like something anyone could knock up like a TV screenplay and I can't see any way it proves itself to be authentic)


A denial would be nice from the impacted parties. So far all that has happened is the PM accepts that Slaters email was hacked.

Love to see a denial. I really would. But I doubt it would be forthcoming.


So does that mean there is no actual technological proof the words are genuine?


Or any proof it's not.

If it wasn't genuine there would be a response ASAP much like the Garner hoax saying that Collins has resigned and Collins tweeted back in no time flat.

First: https://twitter.com/Garner_Live/status/501918325102747648

Then: https://twitter.com/JudithCollinsMP/status/501922374501924865

So far... nothing... crickets chirping. Speaks volumes don't you think?



Personally I think the onus of proof rests with the accusers in a matter like this. If it's the other way around, if I write a piece claiming David Cunliffe is, say, dying of a terminal illness and he decides to not dignify such nonsense with a reply, we can assume I am correct...!


I couldn't say this better myself. Well done. 


BDFL - Memuneh
61751 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12412

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

1 | ... | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.