If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Your must have a unique definition of the word 'proof' ...yes?
DOJ and National Intelligence both verified that the laptop exist, it's very real, and signed off by Hunter Biden himself. Communications from Hunter Biden's laptop are well published.
Your must have a unique definition of the word 'proof' ...yes?
DOJ and National Intelligence both verified that the laptop exist, it's very real, and signed off by Hunter Biden himself. Communications from Hunter Biden's laptop are well published.
C'mon man!
I know that you don't like to read posts before you respond, so I'll just say it again:
The FBI saying that Russia isn't involved doesn't verify a single PDF or picture that's been released. Whether or not a laptop belonged to Hunter Biden doesn't verify a single PDF or picture that's been released. People just saying that they're real doesn't verify a single PDF or picture that's been released.
Verification requires releasing the actual data so that it can be......... verified. I keep asking this, and I never get an answer: why doesn't Giuliani or all these other people who supposedly have the information just release it? It's been over two weeks since the story was released, and we've seen absolutely no proof. He could send it to Fox News. He could upload it himself so that everyone could verify it for themselves. It'd be so easy to just prove that this is all real, but everyone refuses. Instead, the NYPost published PDFs that were created in 2019. Why?
All this story shows is how partisan people like you are. You would NEVER believe a story like this if it were about Trump.
I know that you don't like to read posts before you respond, so I'll just say it again:
The FBI saying that Russia isn't involved doesn't verify a single PDF or picture that's been released. Whether or not a laptop belonged to Hunter Biden doesn't verify a single PDF or picture that's been released. People just saying that they're real doesn't verify a single PDF or picture that's been released.
Verification requires releasing the actual data so that it can be......... verified. I keep asking this, and I never get an answer: why doesn't Giuliani or all these other people who supposedly have the information just release it? It's been over two weeks since the story was released, and we've seen absolutely no proof. He could send it to Fox News. He could upload it himself so that everyone could verify it for themselves. It'd be so easy to just prove that this is all real, but everyone refuses. Instead, the NYPost published PDFs that were created in 2019. Why?
All this story shows is how partisan people like you are. You would NEVER believe a story like this if it were about Trump.
World renowned Cyber Security expert Robert Graham of Errata security often quoted by the Washington Post published this blog last week correctly insisting on the metadata to verify the emails via DKIM. https://blog.erratasec.com/2020/10/y...l#.X5wRIlNKibs
In response Rudy Giuliani turned over emails to the DCNF that then forwarded them to Mr Graham who verified using DKIM that in fact the emails are authentic
I contacted several sources about your suggestion of making the meta data public and I think the reason this metadata was not made public as per your suggestion was that until a credible third party like Mr Graham of Errata Security validated it Google could have simply edited the DKIM on their servers to prove that the emails are not valid had the meta data simply been made available on a public server. Sadly, it has been verified that Google has gone to great lengths to silence conservative voices.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Friday, 30th October, 2020, 06:42 PM.
I was hoping to get a more up to date number but....paywall! In any event, would you please fact check all 22,000+ Trump lies and let us all know in how many cases Trump was "right in the end?" A spreadsheet would be good.
Also, still waiting to find out why AP and NPR are no longer credible sources of news and opinions.
And the Washington Post is an accurate arbiter of truth in what alternate universe? Get real. If Trump wins it is against Crooked Joe Biden, Google, Amazon, Twitter and Facebook. I like his odds.
Why don't I believe that they received "damning" documents about the Bidens and then lost the only copy without making a backup in the latest episode of "we swear that there's all this incriminating stuff on the Bidens; we just can't show you any"? I mean...
Not the only copy. The issue is the temporary loss of the material that would have supported his interview with the whistleblower. Someone at UPS opened the document and took out the thumb drive that contained the data. UPS then destroyed all the evidence after recovering the USB drive supposedly lying on the floor of their mail room. Anyway in the end it was only a speed bump.
Good to see honest Democratic Congressman coming forward in support of Tony Bobulinski ... hope it's not too late.
And right after Twitter CEO Dorsey appeared in front of a Senate Hearing and got crushed by Sen. Cruz ... the New York Post is now allowed back into their own Twitter account.
Gotta love those Dems.
Last edited by Neil Frarey; Friday, 30th October, 2020, 07:37 PM.
World renowned Cyber Security expert Robert Graham of Errata security often quoted by the Washington Post published this blog last week correctly insisting on the metadata to verify the emails via DKIM. https://blog.erratasec.com/2020/10/y...l#.X5wRIlNKibs
In response Rudy Giuliani turned over emails to the DCNF that then forwarded them to Mr Graham who verified using DKIM that in fact the emails are authentic
I contacted several sources about your suggestion of making the meta data public and I think the reason this metadata was not made public as per your suggestion was that until a credible third party like Mr Graham of Errata Security validated it Google could have simply edited the DKIM on their servers to prove that the emails are not valid had the meta data simply been made available on a public server. Sadly, it has been verified that Google has gone to great lengths to silence conservative voices.
This is all I wanted. It's so weird how people are so eager to accept stories without proof because they support their side.
Not the only copy. The issue is the temporary loss of the material that would have supported his interview with the whistleblower. Someone at UPS opened the document and took out the thumb drive that contained the data. UPS then destroyed all the evidence after recovering the USB drive supposedly lying on the floor of their mail room. Anyway in the end it was only a speed bump.
And the Washington Post is an accurate arbiter of truth in what alternate universe? Get real. If Trump wins it is against Crooked Joe Biden, Google, Amazon, Twitter and Facebook. I like his odds.
So now we know, explicitly, that the WP, AP, and NPR are on your list of sneer-worthy news media. Please name three news/opinion organizations that you consider reliable and trustworthy. You're pretty good at sneering at people whose opinions differ from yours. Let us all in on where you find your truths.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
That may well be so.but Tucker Carlson has in no way backed off of the original story. Now that the emails from the original story have been validated via DKIM by respected cybersecurity firm Errata security how do you reconcile this with Joe Biden's claim that this is "Russian disinformation"? Noteworthy is that Twitter uncensored this story. They have backed off of the claim that these emails were stolen by hackers that was their rationalization to censor the story in the first place.
I can assure you that I am in no way in love with Trump. He was not aggressive enough in stopping various branches of his administration in interfering with the Dr patient relationship with respect to treating patients with early .symptoms of COVID19.
I am not in love with Biden either who's ideas are the exact opposite "of following the science".but I digress.
I believe that you honestly follow the truth as do I so again I am interested in how you reconcile Biden's explanation in the face of irrefutable evidence that says
otherwise.
I agree that Twitter should not have censored tweets linking to the NYPost story. Whatever one might think of the Post or the story itself, the Post is not some crank website run by a guy sitting in his basement making stuff up.
That said, there's still not much story here. Or at least, there are a lot more questions than answers. We have a laptop purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden, that was given (of course) to Rudy Giuliani. To the best of my knowledge nobody has verified that it is in fact Hunter Biden's laptop. The repair shop owner/operator claims it to be so but that has not been verified that I've seen. The laptop is purportedly in the possession of the FBI.
Errata Security has indeed verified one email which WAS NOT WRITTEN BY HUNTER BIDEN. So what? Sid, I could send you an email right now thanking you for the Rolex you gave me for my birthday. Errata Security would be able to verify it using the metadata. But all they could demonstrate is that I wrote that email, not that you gave me something for my birthday, let alone a Rolex.
If the email that's been verified is accessible on the laptop then I presume that an email client was used. Presumably then sent items and full email chains can be verified. As I said before, an email sent BY HUNTER BIDEN would be significant. An email sent by someone hawking Viagra does not mean that Hunter Biden has ED.
I agree that Twitter should not have censored tweets linking to the NYPost story. Whatever one might think of the Post or the story itself, the Post is not some crank website run by a guy sitting in his basement making stuff up.
That said, there's still not much story here. Or at least, there are a lot more questions than answers. We have a laptop purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden, that was given (of course) to Rudy Giuliani. To the best of my knowledge nobody has verified that it is in fact Hunter Biden's laptop. The repair shop owner/operator claims it to be so but that has not been verified that I've seen. The laptop is purportedly in the possession of the FBI.
Errata Security has indeed verified one email which WAS NOT WRITTEN BY HUNTER BIDEN. So what? Sid, I could send you an email right now thanking you for the Rolex you gave me for my birthday. Errata Security would be able to verify it using the metadata. But all they could demonstrate is that I wrote that email, not that you gave me something for my birthday, let alone a Rolex.
If the email that's been verified is accessible on the laptop then I presume that an email client was used. Presumably then sent items and full email chains can be verified. As I said before, an email sent BY HUNTER BIDEN would be significant. An email sent by someone hawking Viagra does not mean that Hunter Biden has ED.
Steve
P.S. Thanks for the Rolex.
All well and good except the email was not sent by a random person, it was sent by Hunter Biden's business associate while Biden was VP in 2015. Your argument is nonsensical.
Well, who knows! Nobody believes the polls, nobody is telling you the truth?
Huge early turnout at the advance polls, well that is a good sign for Biden. Isn't it?
For those of us outside the Fox News / OAN / Sinclair / Trump bubble, it is virtually impossible to understand the thought process of those undecided leaning towards voting Trump, but this clip maybe just too close to the truth.
Sid, suppose the following scenario: I drop by a chess tournament where a friend of mine is playing and I chat with him between rounds. You are also playing in the tournament and while my friend is chatting with me you come over to (briefly) join the conversation. We don't know each other so my friend introduces us. The next day I email my friend saying it was great to hang out with him and also that it was nice to meet with you. Does that email show that there's some sort of business relationship between us?
No.
If this is all that exists in the way of "smoking gun" emails, all I can say is that so far there's a lot more smoke than gun.
We have a laptop of questionable provenance, a report by a tabloid not exactly known for journalistic rigour, Trump's fingerprints (via Giuliani) all over it, and emails which hint at maybe there was something. Or maybe not.
If more develops from this (and I don't mean Tucker Carlson having conniptions) I'll pay it more attention.
Tweet
Comment