Not sure what you mean. I looked at the original pdf in wikileaks and it looks like an M not RN.
I used to work in a job that had a lot to do with OCR. If doesn't take a lot of scans to come across errors like these naturally. For me to believe this was intentional, I have to see it in something that didn't originate in a scanned document.
Don't you think WikiLeaks would have brought attention to this if it were true? Wouldn't they have immediately discovered it?
Original PDF actually looks photoshopped right on that m. The e cuts off with an almost perfect line when you zoom in far enough, the m looks slightly off and bolder than surrounding lettering, especially when comparing to the rest of the same letters in the email.
More likely an OCR issue. Someone just commented w/ the sauce on WikiLeaks where there's no misspelling when you look at the original pdf.
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/23757
That’s not an ocr error. Look at the original email, it’s the same font kerning bullshit as corney.
Not sure what you mean. I looked at the original pdf in wikileaks and it looks like an M not RN. I used to work in a job that had a lot to do with OCR. If doesn't take a lot of scans to come across errors like these naturally. For me to believe this was intentional, I have to see it in something that didn't originate in a scanned document. Don't you think WikiLeaks would have brought attention to this if it were true? Wouldn't they have immediately discovered it?
Look at it closer, there are artifacts that make it obvious. If you look at examples for corney, it’s also looks like an M but it’s not.
Original PDF actually looks photoshopped right on that m. The e cuts off with an almost perfect line when you zoom in far enough, the m looks slightly off and bolder than surrounding lettering, especially when comparing to the rest of the same letters in the email.