What exactly do you want? Are you being a cuck intentionally or is video of the election officials themselves admitting they destroy all ballot images not enough for you?
Dude Dr. Shiva IS the "fake Indian" who ran for Senate in MA. He ran in the primary against Kevin O'Connor. I voted for Kevin, but now I'm seeing what a true patriot Dr. Shiva really is. The guy is impressive.
All the small country towns on southcoast are maga too, westport, Rochester, acushnet, freetown, carver, pembroke, lakeville, trump signs everywhere. We had a hand written campaign for Shiva. I wrote him in.
I believe it. Also, I’d wager there are probably a significant minority of people in greater Boston suburbia that are pro Trump secretly. I’m right on the cusp of being behind enemy lines myself
Lived in Boston from 2013 until early this year. There are definitely stealth pedes throughout the city. We just can't signal it in any meaningful way without risking a brick through the window and a bike lock to the head.
I dunno. Out here near 495 we've got a lot of those yuppie towns with a ton of concerned Karens. average suburbs lean Trump, but my apartment building in the center of town is littered with BLM signs. As expected the pricier the apartment the more likely a BLM sign exists.
So is this guy legit or full of shit? I've heard conflicting reports. He seemed genuine to me but I assume it's possible he's a deliberate disinformation agent.
He's an aggressive AF self-promoter, with legitimate credentials and he seems to court controversy. IMO he is worth listening to but it's best to analyze everything from him very critically. His statistical work that has been widely shared regarding the election in Michigan was, IMO, among the least persuasive approaches taken using stats to address election fraud. The data seemed just fine but the way they chose to plot it was convoluted and confusing for a ton of people. Did more harm than good IMO.
Normies couldn't read it but he was using a program similar to spss for statistical analysis and I learned to read graphs like that in big data mining courses. He would be able to explain it in a court of law as an expert.
Worked with a bunch of H1Bs a long time ago and they just had this culture of self-aggrandizement and stating things with more certainty than any Westerner would. I think in India you have to act like that to get ahead.
Some of them were dunces, some were very smart people that actually did know what they were talking about. If I didn't have that experience I would just dismiss Shiva as some kind of charlatan, but it's hard to say. His second video addressed the debunkings I saw, but he could have easily fit those explanations in the first one if he didn't spend the first half self-promoting and talking down.
I watched his recent video about unfortunate truths about the us voting system. I'm an engineer at a big company and do analysis of our software to understand the edge cases that are only present at very large scale. I create visualizations of data all the time to see patterns in the statistics. His presentation had several problems.
He makes hypothesis about the relationship between the % of vote for Trump in straight party vote and % vote for Trump in individual candidate votes. It's that if you look at a set of precincts, the greater % of straight Republican vote, the % of individual votes for Trump there should be. If you make a scatter plot of precincts in a chart with x as straight ticket % and y as individual candidate % the points should follow an upward slope. Actually, he assumes and implies it should be 45% upward. It's the hypothesis, but it's counter intuitive to me because id expect the % of individual votes to be the same regardless of what % voted straight ticket. Maybe it should even decrease - in a Democrat area expect Trump votes to be just for candidate, in more Republican areas those votes trend toward straight ticket.
He plots the data in a needlessly complicated way that makes it more difficult to discern a pattern, let alone one that supports his hypothesis. Instead of just plotting the data and seeing how close to 45% the plot tracks, he does a subtraction that would make it track the x axis if his hypothesis were true. Essentially he's rotating the graph clockwise. Surprise, doing this transformation made the plot track a downward slope.
He shows plots for 4 counties and they "detected an algorithm" 3. There is clearly a huge difference in one, a smoking gun for fraud. But if you look carefully at this plot you can see it was created with a different methodology than the other ones. There are points that cannot exist. There is a point at (4, -20) which would indicate Trump got -16% of the individual candidate vote, a nonsense number. So we can't even take the difference in this fourth county as any kind of evidence because it isn't created with the same methodology as the other, or the underlying data is erroneous.
If I had his data set I could do an analysis to detect the type of fraud he claims he found evidence of, but he doesn't provide the data set and hasn't responded to my feedback/requests.
So to summarize I think his presentation is so flawed that it can't provide evidence of fraud. It was a great video and I agree with all of the sentiments, but I think it's a flawed hypothesis, he uses the wrong methodology to try to prove it, and doesn't even apply his own methodology correctly.
I also heard lots of crap about him but now I think that was kinda of a smear campaign I have been following him. Recently. Few things come to mind. He has 4 PHd's. 2. He is fucking pissed, perhaps about his own run for office, getting cheated. 3. He is been on it since day 1 calling out the fraud and he basically also found the algorithm dominion used through modeling, his evidence alone is enough to call voter fraud beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Dropping a law suit to some shitty tech blog doesn't mean shit about the truth. All that means is that the law suit was dropped. Fake fucking journalists post fake shit all day every day and keep it up, it doesn't mean their claims are truthful.
Dropping a law suit to some shitty tech blog doesn't mean shit about the truth.
He spent more than 2 years trying to sue them for defamation. The fact that he finally gave up would tell any rational person that he's full of shit.
V.A. Shiva Ayyadurai is not a member of the MIT faculty and did not invent email. In 1980 he created a small-scale electronic mail system used within University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, but this could not send messages outside the university and included no important features missing from earlier systems. The details of Ayyadurai’s program were never published, it was never commercialized, and it had no apparent influence on any further work in the field. He does not “hold the patent for email” or have a copyright on the word email, though in 1982 he did register a copyright claim covering the exact text of a program called "EMAIL." The U.S. Government has not recognized him as the inventor of email and he did not win the Westinghouse Science Talent Search for his program. Electronic mail services were widely used in the 1960s and 1970s and were commercially available long before 1980. To substantiate his claim to be the "inventor of email" Ayyadurai would have to show that no electronic mail system was produced prior to 1980, and so he has recently created an absurdly specific and historically inaccurate definition of electronic mail designed to exclude earlier systems. Ayyadurai has not even been able to show that he was the first to contract “electronic mail” to “email” or “e-mail” – his first documented use is in 1981 whereas the Oxford English Dictionary shows a newspaper usage in 1979. Despite Ayyadurai’s energetic public relations campaign, which presents him as the victim of a racist conspiracy financed by corporate interests, he has not received support from any credible experts in email technology or the history of information technology. His claims have been widely debunked by technology bloggers and articles based on them have been retracted by the Washington Post and the Huffington Post.
It is true folks that Shiva is a fraud. I have been saying that for a long time. He says a lot of truthful things, but he is extremely deceptive, fraudulent, and a liar. People need to be careful. As an example, there was a famous incident where he said RFK jr (whose nephew was running against Shiva in the senate race) refused to shake his hand and was a total a-hole. Then someone posted a photo of the event and they were smiling and taking photos with their arms around each other. The guy's a snake.
Whether his new lawsuit in MA for voting will go anywhere, who knows. I hope so. He has helped uncover certain things. But be aware of who this guy is.
If you think that giving up on a two year long lawsuit with a shitty tech blog means he's full of shit then I have no hope for our conversation because thats a retarded position to take and exposes that you don't know shit about lawsuits.
The email thing is contested. He invented a version of email, basically a text file that can be transmitted. Years later, the other guys invented the interface with the text file. So, whatever.
The thing about e-mails is disputed, based off of my knowledge of computing history (albeit somewhat limited knowledge), it's a disputed claim with someone else by the name of Ray Tomlinson; who used ARPANET to send electronic communications back in the early 70's. Either way, it's redundant, because Dr. Shiva is still the real deal when it comes to computing as acknowledged by his work at Brookhaven National Laboratory, as well as his education credentials.
Can't say anything about Massachussetts, don't know how they do things over there with ballot imaging lol.
He is a big advocate against internet censorship. As a result the whole "email" thing has become a huge topic in an attempt to discredit him. That should tell anyone all they really need to know about it.
It's disputed definitely. He did not however invent the concept which I think is what is so highly debated amongst tech people in the know. Also don't forget a lot of the older guys just aren't around anymore. A lot of people do not realize that modern 'email' is much more than text. There is a also a protocol behind it. It took years across multiple areas for what we now know as email to happen.
This as far as I recall, is the beginning, the push to implement messaging over ftp. So some history..
Here is where the format was really defined, and they called them text messages. Which eventually would be the backbone i.e. format of defining what we know as modern email. RFC733
Edit: There are revisions to these of course but these are some of the earliest ones I recall learning about back in the day. Before AOL was sending out CD's to everyone.
He copyrighted the text of a program that he named "EMAIL". Other email systems already existed long before that:
He does not “hold the patent for email” or have a copyright on the word email, though in 1982 he did register a copyright claim covering the exact text of a program called "EMAIL." The U.S. Government has not recognized him as the inventor of email and he did not win the Westinghouse Science Talent Search for his program. Electronic mail services were widely used in the 1960s and 1970s and were commercially available long before 1980.
To be clear, Dr. Ayyadurai does not claim to have invented (nor has he ever claimed to have invented) electronic messaging. Methods for the transport of messages through electrical and electronic devices date back to the 1840s with the inventions of the telegraph and Morse Code. Dr. Ayyadurai also acknowledges that prior to 1978, many other individuals made important contributions toward the development of electronic messaging. However, Dr. Ayyadurai’s 1978 invention was the first to embody the features we experience today in modern email.
Fits perfectly in line with his claims: it's about his specific invention. Namely, it is a unified messaging system which embodies the feature set of what we call/know as email today. He's not wrong that he invented it. It's the same way that it's not wrong to say that Xerox invented the modern 'desktop environment' for computers, even though some bits and pieces were around in rudimentary forms in the 1960s.
Is there actually proof ballot images were destroyed?
They deleted the ballot images that were scanned. They openly admit to doing it. In clear violation of the law. They just dont care.
Yes
Source?
DEPORT NOOB
REMOVE KABAB
☝️☝️ Don't click, DEPORT
What evidence indicates they don't exist?
What exactly do you want? Are you being a cuck intentionally or is video of the election officials themselves admitting they destroy all ballot images not enough for you?
It would appear I'm asking for the link to said video
He’s a somewhat strange dude. He tried a bit of the Trump style when running against the fake Indian for Senate.
Even so, there are lots and lots of Trump supporters in MA, once you get outside the cities.
Dude Dr. Shiva IS the "fake Indian" who ran for Senate in MA. He ran in the primary against Kevin O'Connor. I voted for Kevin, but now I'm seeing what a true patriot Dr. Shiva really is. The guy is impressive.
As a MA pede I can verify this statement. East of rt. 128 is Trump country
*West. West of rt 128. Derp. ‘Holds up hand in shape of L to reorient right and left’
All the small country towns on southcoast are maga too, westport, Rochester, acushnet, freetown, carver, pembroke, lakeville, trump signs everywhere. We had a hand written campaign for Shiva. I wrote him in.
I believe it. Also, I’d wager there are probably a significant minority of people in greater Boston suburbia that are pro Trump secretly. I’m right on the cusp of being behind enemy lines myself
Lived in Boston from 2013 until early this year. There are definitely stealth pedes throughout the city. We just can't signal it in any meaningful way without risking a brick through the window and a bike lock to the head.
Swansea checking in. Trump won my town.
I dunno. Out here near 495 we've got a lot of those yuppie towns with a ton of concerned Karens. average suburbs lean Trump, but my apartment building in the center of town is littered with BLM signs. As expected the pricier the apartment the more likely a BLM sign exists.
That checks out. I know the kind of towns your talking about. They follow the same trends as other urban centers, just scaled down versions
So is this guy legit or full of shit? I've heard conflicting reports. He seemed genuine to me but I assume it's possible he's a deliberate disinformation agent.
He's an aggressive AF self-promoter, with legitimate credentials and he seems to court controversy. IMO he is worth listening to but it's best to analyze everything from him very critically. His statistical work that has been widely shared regarding the election in Michigan was, IMO, among the least persuasive approaches taken using stats to address election fraud. The data seemed just fine but the way they chose to plot it was convoluted and confusing for a ton of people. Did more harm than good IMO.
Normies couldn't read it but he was using a program similar to spss for statistical analysis and I learned to read graphs like that in big data mining courses. He would be able to explain it in a court of law as an expert.
Worked with a bunch of H1Bs a long time ago and they just had this culture of self-aggrandizement and stating things with more certainty than any Westerner would. I think in India you have to act like that to get ahead.
Some of them were dunces, some were very smart people that actually did know what they were talking about. If I didn't have that experience I would just dismiss Shiva as some kind of charlatan, but it's hard to say. His second video addressed the debunkings I saw, but he could have easily fit those explanations in the first one if he didn't spend the first half self-promoting and talking down.
Yeah he figured out the outter appearance of MAGA, but without the substance.
He got the first patent for it. He's a math / programming savant with four PHDs.
i did
Yes he did, I think he is the one developed interoffice email or something. But he def had a hand in some major aspect.
He wrote a program named "email" which isn't the real email of course.
Oh, no... was it part of Lotus Notes?
He is a narcissist. Use but do not get used.
To be more clear: He's in this for the attention. He's willing to take hits for his attention. Let him. Don't take hits for his attention.
I watched his recent video about unfortunate truths about the us voting system. I'm an engineer at a big company and do analysis of our software to understand the edge cases that are only present at very large scale. I create visualizations of data all the time to see patterns in the statistics. His presentation had several problems.
He makes hypothesis about the relationship between the % of vote for Trump in straight party vote and % vote for Trump in individual candidate votes. It's that if you look at a set of precincts, the greater % of straight Republican vote, the % of individual votes for Trump there should be. If you make a scatter plot of precincts in a chart with x as straight ticket % and y as individual candidate % the points should follow an upward slope. Actually, he assumes and implies it should be 45% upward. It's the hypothesis, but it's counter intuitive to me because id expect the % of individual votes to be the same regardless of what % voted straight ticket. Maybe it should even decrease - in a Democrat area expect Trump votes to be just for candidate, in more Republican areas those votes trend toward straight ticket.
He plots the data in a needlessly complicated way that makes it more difficult to discern a pattern, let alone one that supports his hypothesis. Instead of just plotting the data and seeing how close to 45% the plot tracks, he does a subtraction that would make it track the x axis if his hypothesis were true. Essentially he's rotating the graph clockwise. Surprise, doing this transformation made the plot track a downward slope.
He shows plots for 4 counties and they "detected an algorithm" 3. There is clearly a huge difference in one, a smoking gun for fraud. But if you look carefully at this plot you can see it was created with a different methodology than the other ones. There are points that cannot exist. There is a point at (4, -20) which would indicate Trump got -16% of the individual candidate vote, a nonsense number. So we can't even take the difference in this fourth county as any kind of evidence because it isn't created with the same methodology as the other, or the underlying data is erroneous.
If I had his data set I could do an analysis to detect the type of fraud he claims he found evidence of, but he doesn't provide the data set and hasn't responded to my feedback/requests.
So to summarize I think his presentation is so flawed that it can't provide evidence of fraud. It was a great video and I agree with all of the sentiments, but I think it's a flawed hypothesis, he uses the wrong methodology to try to prove it, and doesn't even apply his own methodology correctly.
I also heard lots of crap about him but now I think that was kinda of a smear campaign I have been following him. Recently. Few things come to mind. He has 4 PHd's. 2. He is fucking pissed, perhaps about his own run for office, getting cheated. 3. He is been on it since day 1 calling out the fraud and he basically also found the algorithm dominion used through modeling, his evidence alone is enough to call voter fraud beyond a shadow of a doubt.
'This is not the way.'
Based Doc.
Shiva's a bit of a blowhard. I don't fully trust him.
How can all of the brand new claims be already disputed? jack? You little bitch. Are you there?
So you are saying Massachusetts is now in play?
Ordinarily I'd say no way in hell. But now, there's really no way to guess just how fixed the elections have been here for years.
If there's one thing we learned from Obama the manchurian candidate, it's that this guy doesn't have standing.
So apparently this guy is full of shit on two counts:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20201101/16264445627/shiva-ayyadurais-lawsuit-against-massachusetts-official-actually-raises-interesting-1st-amendment-question-about-election.shtml
Dropping a law suit to some shitty tech blog doesn't mean shit about the truth. All that means is that the law suit was dropped. Fake fucking journalists post fake shit all day every day and keep it up, it doesn't mean their claims are truthful.
Bro he did not invent email lol
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc733
Yeah that's how a lot of stuff goes. When there's a collective incremental effort it's pretty absurd to portray yourself as the "inventor" of it.
This was published before Shiva's work: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc733
I doubt many of the overnight tech experts here even know what the term RFC means.
He has a patent for something called EMAIL.
Even if it's not what you refer to as email it's still true he invented "Email" lmfao
Stay in your lane you smoothbrain.
lmfao, I doubt you can code your way out of a paper bag. Maybe you should stick to putting things in boxes, or whatever it is you do
He spent more than 2 years trying to sue them for defamation. The fact that he finally gave up would tell any rational person that he's full of shit.
It is true folks that Shiva is a fraud. I have been saying that for a long time. He says a lot of truthful things, but he is extremely deceptive, fraudulent, and a liar. People need to be careful. As an example, there was a famous incident where he said RFK jr (whose nephew was running against Shiva in the senate race) refused to shake his hand and was a total a-hole. Then someone posted a photo of the event and they were smiling and taking photos with their arms around each other. The guy's a snake.
Whether his new lawsuit in MA for voting will go anywhere, who knows. I hope so. He has helped uncover certain things. But be aware of who this guy is.
If you think that giving up on a two year long lawsuit with a shitty tech blog means he's full of shit then I have no hope for our conversation because thats a retarded position to take and exposes that you don't know shit about lawsuits.
The email thing is contested. He invented a version of email, basically a text file that can be transmitted. Years later, the other guys invented the interface with the text file. So, whatever.
The thing about e-mails is disputed, based off of my knowledge of computing history (albeit somewhat limited knowledge), it's a disputed claim with someone else by the name of Ray Tomlinson; who used ARPANET to send electronic communications back in the early 70's. Either way, it's redundant, because Dr. Shiva is still the real deal when it comes to computing as acknowledged by his work at Brookhaven National Laboratory, as well as his education credentials.
Can't say anything about Massachussetts, don't know how they do things over there with ballot imaging lol.
He is a big advocate against internet censorship. As a result the whole "email" thing has become a huge topic in an attempt to discredit him. That should tell anyone all they really need to know about it.
It's disputed definitely. He did not however invent the concept which I think is what is so highly debated amongst tech people in the know. Also don't forget a lot of the older guys just aren't around anymore. A lot of people do not realize that modern 'email' is much more than text. There is a also a protocol behind it. It took years across multiple areas for what we now know as email to happen.
This as far as I recall, is the beginning, the push to implement messaging over ftp. So some history..
RFC 475
Here is where the format was really defined, and they called them text messages. Which eventually would be the backbone i.e. format of defining what we know as modern email. RFC733
RFC 733
I mentioned protocol above and here it is. SMTP (simple mail transmission protocol) This is 1982!
RFC 821
Edit: There are revisions to these of course but these are some of the earliest ones I recall learning about back in the day. Before AOL was sending out CD's to everyone.
He copyrighted the text of a program that he named "EMAIL". Other email systems already existed long before that:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190518/23370542236/laying-out-all-evidence-shiva-ayyadurai-did-not-invent-email.shtml
You could also display this own statement on it, too, rather than shilling techdirt smear jobs. https://www.inventorofemail.com/Shiva-Ayyadurai.asp
Fits perfectly in line with his claims: it's about his specific invention. Namely, it is a unified messaging system which embodies the feature set of what we call/know as email today. He's not wrong that he invented it. It's the same way that it's not wrong to say that Xerox invented the modern 'desktop environment' for computers, even though some bits and pieces were around in rudimentary forms in the 1960s.
REEEEs now go FOOOOOSHIIIIIT