142
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by Egon@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

This post was fact checked by real hexbearistan chapos

all 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] regul@hexbear.net 83 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

He studied at the feet of Alex Jones when it comes to being cross-examined: "Deny everything even if they have it in writing. Especially if you gain nothing materially by doing so."

[-] FourteenEyes@hexbear.net 66 points 9 months ago

The best thing you can do for your case is to look like you don't know what's going on and/or are acting in bad faith

[-] SacredExcrement@hexbear.net 17 points 9 months ago

Similarly, we can hope it results in the same outcome as the Alex Jones case, where he is fined more money than he is worth

It won't, but let me dream

[-] DyingOfDeBordom@hexbear.net 9 points 9 months ago

The Hillary Clinton school of "they can'tc prosecute you if they can't show intent and disregard or redefine anything that would change that" except that only works with the prosecutors assistance

[-] allthetimesivedied@hexbear.net 80 points 9 months ago

Um.

Reality is becoming a fucking sitcom.

[-] sovietknuckles@hexbear.net 50 points 9 months ago

The stenographer had to sit there with a serious face and type that

[-] NephewAlphaBravo@hexbear.net 30 points 9 months ago
[-] corgiwithalaptop@hexbear.net 10 points 9 months ago

Freeze frame

Record scratch

Yeah, that's me. Bet you're wondering how I got here.

[-] aaaaaaadjsf@hexbear.net 17 points 9 months ago

Cue the "Curb Your Enthusiasm" outro meme.

[-] axont@hexbear.net 39 points 9 months ago

I am a being of immortal light and refuse to acknowledge words from mere paper

[-] CarbonScored@hexbear.net 34 points 9 months ago

Did plaintiff's counsel and opposing counsel agree that 1 = 1? Because if not then Elon was using non-euclidean logic and the other stipulations can't apply, checkmate.

[-] ValpoYAFF@hexbear.net 16 points 9 months ago

I'm pretty sure even in non Euclidean systems 1 can equal 1. Does Euclid even apply to logic? Do you just mean any system which uses axioms?

[-] motherofmonsters@hexbear.net 18 points 9 months ago

Mr Musk, I’ll be axiom the questions

[-] CarbonScored@hexbear.net 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

You are absolutely correct, I'm not aware of Euclid applying to logic at all. I just couldn't think of a more appropriate word for communicating that specific kind of nonsense. 'Non-axiomatic' could've been cooler.

[-] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 5 points 9 months ago

There are various non-classical logics, like dialethic systems, could allow for his statement to be correct by, for example, allowing both A and ~A. You could probably also find some way to prove using a system that limits the transitive property that the "Elon Musk" referred to in the documents is not the person speaking (or in any case cannot be proved to be the same, and therefore his statement cannot be proven false)

[-] odmroz@hexbear.net 19 points 9 months ago
this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2024
142 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13546 readers
820 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS