156
Cyber-Security Experts Warn in Open Letter to Harris Election Was Hacked; Elon Musk is "guilty as fuck"
(www.planetcritical.com)
this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2024
156 points (80.5% liked)
Enough Musk Spam
2271 readers
453 users here now
For those that have had enough of the Elon Musk worship online.
No flaming, baiting, etc. This community is intended for those opposed to the influx of Elon Musk-related advertising online. Coming here to defend Musk or his companies will not get you banned, but it likely will result in downvotes. Please use the reporting feature if you see a rule violation.
Opinions from all sides of the political spectrum are welcome here. However, we kindly ask that off-topic political discussion be kept to a minimum, so as to focus on the goal of this sub. This community is minimally moderated, so discussion and the power of upvotes/downvotes are allowed, provided lemmy.world rules are not broken.
Post links to instances of obvious Elon Musk fanboy brigading in default subreddits, lemmy/kbin communities/instances, astroturfing from Tesla/SpaceX/etc., or any articles critical of Musk, his ideas, unrealistic promises and timelines, or the working conditions at his companies.
Tesla-specific discussion can be posted here as well as our sister community /c/RealTesla.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
you are delusional.
I watched your silly video.
do you also not believe in the fraudulent electors scheme that has been documented and happened and people have been convicted for?
do you not believe in the call Trump made to Georgia to try to literally create votes out of nothing?
you can post baseless YouTube videos all you want, they don't contradict the facts.
When? In the one minute it took you to reply to me posting it? /s
Have fun in your world of conspiracies.
I've seen that trash several times now
mega heads have been posting it.
have fun making things up.
Says the person whose primary source pretty much only writes in conditionals and calls them "facts".
If you watched it so often, why don't you address her points, then?
I literally addressed her points in the other comment.
which part confused you?
she basically agrees with me.
the guy was right before in 2004, we know that Republicans do steal elections and try to steal one 4 years ago, so we should do recounts this time.
you didn't watch her video did you?
you just went along with the headline.
You didn't at the time I wrote the other comment. Again: wtf are you trying to pull off, lying and shit?
No, she doesn't. He didn't claim anything like that in 2000. From the transcript:
First, you call her right wing, then you claim that she's lying, then you claim that she agrees with you by misquoting her. Pathetic.
yeah dude, i didn't answer you before you asked a question.
do you understand how questions work?
go ahead. keep making stuff up, anyone can scroll up.
1.you're being so informal and dude-ish with me, though.
haha, because I'll tell you, that's not how you do it.
again the facts:
4 years ago, Trump and his team perpetrated the fake electors game and try to steal the election.
2 years after that, we had proof that they stole voting software.
now, many security experts are telling us that because of that stolen software and the fake electro scheme, we should manually count the votes in the states that determined the presidential election because they easily could have been manipulated or fabricated.
you don't like this one other scientist guy.
fine, write him a me and letter where you make stuff up about him.
but all that other stuff is real and all those other computer scientists?
also real, whether you like it or not.
I don't like you assuming my gender, homie.
I'd like for people not lying about shit they said.
Edit: so you think that shit went puplic 4 years ago and didn't even work back then would work now, when everybody knows he already tried to pull that shit?
I don't understand how the software sourcecode having leaked means that machines have been compromized. That only means thatecurity through obscurity policies won't work anymore. But that's a horrible policy.
your gender?
what the tangent are you talking about?
okay, you don't understand how manipulating software means voting machines could be compromised.
dang, really?
I'm going to try and analogize this....
okay, you can think about compromising a software program like physical sabotage.
so let's say you have an ice cream machine with two levers sticking out front that gives out chocolate and vanilla ice cream.
If you pull the chocolate tap, you'll get chocolate ice cream.
If you pull the vanilla tap, you'll get vanilla ice cream.
let's say you only like chocolate and have access to the inside of the ice cream machine.
so if you can get inside the machine, you connect both lovers to the chocolate press tab but remove the vanilla press tab, so now, pulling either the chocolate or vanilla will only dispense chocolate ice cream.
The machine might look normal on the outside, but now regardless of the input, it's giving you the output that you want.
so if you get inside something, you can change how it works, so that it gives you the result you want.
does that make sense?
you can do the same thing with a computer program.
you can go inside, change what it says, to do what you want.
Yes. My gender. Don't call me Jack.
Sugar, I'm an embedded software engineer. Try mansplaining tosomeone else.
The source code was leaked. It didn't say anything about compromized firmware being flashed.
go ahead and call me sugar, Jack.
Why is Jack used in a common phrase a gendered name to you?
do you get angry if people say "guys" to a mixed group?
your concerns seem unnecessarily exhausting. for you.
You don't get to police what gender people find acceptable to be called. You're closer to Trump's ideology than I am if you don't get that.
what are you talking about?
you called me sugar.
you are implying that you get to police what gender people find acceptable?
besides, I literally said those are the facts Jack.
which is a very common phrase and Jack isn't even a gendered name.
Why are you assigning gender to it?
"You're closer to Trump's ideology than I am"
Trump is obsessed with gender.
I'm not.
you seem obsessed with gender.
so who's closer to trump?