I only meant it as constructive criticism. If we allow ourselves to break decorum, often chaos follows. Sure, it can be fun to cut loose from time to time, but you have to consider the cost.
I also suspect there may be some highly secret means to break these various encryptions and whatnot, but it is certainly not common or e-commerce and banking wouldn't be possible anymore.
It is fine to disagree, even good! I was just trying to encourage more respectful interaction and pointing out where things kinda went off the rails. It's all good, tho :) We can unite against evil and argue about the minor differences after! :D
Have a good night!
I don't think Mike has said where they came from or how they were obtained. I've always thought it sure sounds like a military operation with a lot more access than average people have.
Found this way down at the very end of your article:
Kurt Olsen, a lawyer on Mr. Lindell’s team said there were multiple sources of the data that Mr. Lindell claims to have, and did not confirm that Mr. Mongtomery was the source of the data. He also clarified that the $5 million challenge has not been canceled and that Mr. Merritt would not be privy to that information.
Clarification: The article previously described Mr. Merritt as Lindell’s lead cyber expert. Mr. Merritt is a cyber expert on the red team hired by Mr. Lindell to interrogate the data for the symposium, and does not work directly for Mr. Lindell.
I think it is still libel when, after lying to malign someone, you close up with a, "nah, jk, bro!"
EDIT: If that Merritt guy is really on Lindell's team, if anything, that proves Mike isn't hiring yes-men. Also if true, Merritt sounds like he might be an activist. If so, and if he cannot set his personal biases aside, then he is unfit as a cyber professional and should be dismissed without pay.
It is inconceivable that the pcaps under discussion here were not encrypted. The fact that Mike has them likely means whomever obtained them had access to the cryptographic keys involved. If so, then it is effectively impossible that they were altered. Faking them would also be effectively impossible. Consider them as safe and certain as your digital banking activity. Therefore, your criticisms are a bit wrongheaded. Regardless, mocking laughter is a form of logical fallacy and makes you look like a jackass. You should always strive to treat others with respect, how I'm sure you would like to be treated, yourself.
I don't have time to answer from scratch, but I'm hoping some copypasta from an old post of mine will help:
After reading a couple of somewhat negative comments that betrayed a lack of fundamental understanding, I wanted to offer some small clarification on Mike's video. Specifically, I want to address the concern that this just boils down to some anonymous guy's opinion. Nothing could be further from the truth. What Mike claims to have is 100% objective proof that is independent of any particular opinion or analysis. I will briefly try to explain.
There are a couple relevant technologies here that I would like to break down a little bit. I want to try to break this down for laypeople in a bit less technical wording. The first is networking communications between computers.
When data is transmitted across a network, like on the Internet, that data is broken up into what are called 'packets'. For now, let's just think of these as post cards like you would fill out and place in the mail. So if you want to send the Holy Bible to a friend, one (inefficient) way of doing so would be to copy the bible down onto post cards. Fit as much as you can on a post card, then mail that post card to the recipient. This would be very time-consuming, and the post cards might arrive out of order. Some might also be lost in the mail, so you might include a number on each card to identify the order. Then, if by the end there are missing numbers, you might re-write those cards and send the new copies to your recipient. Again, these post cards are analogous to network 'packets' as described in Mike's video.
But what if someone intercepts your mail and alters your post cards? Then your friend might have a copy of the Bible that has been altered, even to the point of conveying a different or opposite message at any or all points. This is a real problem, and it is also a problem for network packets. However, there is a long-established solution. Without that solution, secure online transactions from purchases to banking would all be impossible. So we all already know that technology exists to address this problem, but most of us do not understand it very well.
Sadly, it is quite a bit harder to explain in lay terms how the technology works to guarantee our 'post cards'/packets aren't altered as they are transmitted through the network, but I am going to try. The basic technology involves advanced mathematical encryption of the same sort your online bank would use. This mathematical solution involves a private key and a public key. In our analogy, both you, the sender, and your recipient would have both private and public keys. The private key would be kept secret, but the public key can be shared. These keys can be used to encrypt data such that only the intended recipient can read it. Even more importantly here, these keys can also be used to create a digital signature. This signature incorporates every detail of the network packets or your post cards in a cryptographic algorithm such that it can be proven with mathematical certainty whether or not the contents of the packet or post card has been altered in any way. This is still quite complicated, so let me give a simple example:
Let's say one of your post cards says, "#1346: For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. John 3:16 (NIV)". Using a cryptographic signature, your recipient could verify that the message contents has not been altered with such precision that, if even the received message left out, altered, or added A SINGLE CHARACTER, the digital signature WOULD NOT MATCH and would thus prove with MATHEMATICAL CERTAINTY that the message had not been accurately transmitted. In the case of a computer network, that packet would be discarded and a new attempt would be made to send the correct packet with the correct contents.
So, putting this all together, it is as if the voting machines communicated via post cards in the mail to each other. Each post card is time and date stamped, marked for its proper order in the transmission, and every detail is digitally signed so that it can be proven with MATHEMATICAL CERTAINTY whether or not the data was altered between the sender and receiver. Mike claims to have EVERY SINGLE POST CARD FOR THE ENTIRE ELECTION, COMPLETE WITH DIGITAL SIGNATURE! Furthermore, Mike has claimed elsewhere that proper, legal chain of custody was maintained with this data from the time of collection to the present. If both of these claims are true, that can be easily proven, confirmed, and verified. And it means that ANYONE who has the proper training/understanding to check the data will have no choice but to come to the exact same conclusion that his anonymous expert came to. The information IS NOT DEPENDENT ON AN EXPERT TESTIMONY! If this is not true, then digital commerce and online banking would be an impossibility.
So, one last time, let's try to go over a complete analogy. Let's say computers did not exist but mathematical cryptography for encryption and signing is possible. Let's say that all machines in the election were replaced with humans who communicated all election information via post cards which used cryptographic signing to ensure that all data maintained its accuracy. This would include communications like, "Take the votes we tallied since our last post card and add them to the running total for our state. Then add that to the running total for the nation." Some of these post cards might be from foreign actors saying things like, "Biden is falling too far behind in Michigan! Take 32,213 votes from Trump and re-assign those to Biden." Every post card is numbered so you can piece together the original number. Every post card has a data and time stamp, as well. And every post card is cryptographically signed in a way that allows the recipient to confirm whether or not the original message made it without being altered. You can think of this as a mathematical formula each person has. Each also has two very long strings of data corresponding to a private and public key. So when Person A wants to send an update to Person B, he first writes the message, then runs the message through a mathematical function/algorithm along with his secret key and his recipient's public key. The function/algorithm spits out exactly what he then writes on the final post card and sends to the recipient. Furthermore, each new post card includes a cryptographic hash pointing to the previous post card sent. This way, each new post card can be verifiably linked to the previous post card. And Mike has ALL of these post cards!
One final remark about the cryptographic signatures: these are sort of like the "Royal Seal" a king might have used in times past. Royal edicts would have a hot wax seal that the king would press his signet ring into on the assumption that no one can break the seal and put it back without the king's own ring which remains in his possession. Cryptographic signing is MUCH more secure than this!
And, finally, here are a few Wikipedia references to relevant technology discussed above for those who want to dive more deeply into the technical aspects:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_signature >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public-key_cryptography
Understood! Sorry to nitpick before you even had a chance to get the edit through. I'm excited about the Cyber Symposium tomorrow and eager to make sure as many watch as possible! I'm sure you understand :)
Mike said today that, if you have trouble accessing frankspeech.com, you can watch the Cyber Symposium via lindelltv.com, I think it was. I hope that helps!
Bottom line: I'm very much inclined to trust Mike. I hope I never come to regret that. I do not think that I will.
That's generally my stance, as well. Mike's frankspeech.com is a site for which you should make an exception.
The social media aspect will not be turned on until a later phase. Mike has been very clear about that. The current phase is about educating and communicating with the public. You should make a point to check out the livestream from time to time. It is some of the best news/analysis I've seen about relevant topics including deep discussions of Christian faith. And I'm not talking frou-frou Bible-thumping. Like one guy they had on has degrees from MIT and a Theological Seminary in Texas. It has really inspired me to deeper faith. I cannot recommend it highly enough. It is not primarily news feed. In fact, I haven't paid much attention to the parts of the site other than the livestream.
To be clear, I think you mean you regularly received 4-5 scam calls a day BEFORE signing up for frankspeech.com. I do not believe you received any BECAUSE you signed up for frankspeech.com. Important to be clear that there seems to be no spam resulting from signing up an frankspeech.com. Like you said, an occasional message about them going live, and that is it.
I would strongly recommend gaining access to frankspeech.com even though it requires email and phone number. And that is coming from someone who almost never is willing to give any personal information. After signing up, you will usually only receive a single message letting you know when they're about to go live. Mike has said that it is easy to unsubscribe later if you wish. I trust him, but I don't plan on unsubscribing.
I mainly watching the livestream, whatever is on. Brannon Howse is the host, and he has all sorts of excellent guests on. Many of the segments are 30-60 minutes and sometimes even longer. You can learn a lot there. I am particularly impressed by much of the relevant historical analysis and the quality of guests. They have even had 80-90+ year old veterans talking about personal knowledge and experience. It is truly top-notch stuff!
Beyond the livestream, I haven't done as much with the site. Mike says it will eventually be more social media oriented, but that is a later phase. This early phase has been primarily about educating the public and establishing an outlet for important information. There are some excellent Christian theological discussions on there, as well. I have discovered two superb lecturers on scripture/theology by watching frankspeech.com livestream, and it has strengthened my Christian faith remarkably.
Honestly, frankspeech.com is a site you should be visiting daily or you will most certainly be missing out on really solid intel. And the Cyber Symposium starts at 9 am CST! If you have any trouble with frankspeech.com, Mike said the Symposium will also be available via lindelltv.com, I believe it was.
tl;dr - Sign up for frankspeech.com and view it regularly. I did, and I'm probably more reluctant to give out my info than are you. No regrets!
People need to start bringing megaphones to these events. They cut the mic, use the megaphone, and drag your point out ten times longer. Move about the room confirming everyone has heard you. Repeat yourself until they all do.
Setting the toxic shot propaganda, the depiction of the future in that video is highly dystopian! A bunch of geriatric Leftist morons clubbing at some dive bar--wtf?! And the sky isn't even clear when it shows the beach scene! It is so extreme as to make one wonder if perhaps Heineken is actually trying to wake people up!
My prayers are with you, also. I hope SA can be stabilized and returned to glory soon. I would love to visit the region! Godspeed, fren!
Yes, inequality. Not all players are equally intelligent, equally civilized, equally law-abiding, equally God-fearing, etc. The same sorts of inequalities that led to God delivering the Promised Land from the Canaanites to the Israelites. Pray God likewise purges iniquity from our midst in the very near future.
Cruz is probably benefitting from illicit sales and doesn't want legal competition. I wanted to like him for a while, but he's all talk.
This is something that surprised me. I really figured if the Dem's succeeded in stealing power even for a minute, one of the first things they'd do is legalize marijuana federally. It seemed so easy and likely to distract and pacify to a substantial degree. Even weirder, I haven't even heard a peep about it until this. My guess has been that they have too much dark money wrapped up in the illicit sales and didn't want to legalize and create competition for themselves.
I hate to be rude, but the blunt truth is that if your wife is willing to consider the vaccine AND going to Canada considering what's going on up there . . . Well, as I said, I hate to be rude. I'll let you finish my thought as I'm sure you're better positioned to accurately assess her situation than I am. Now if you could convince her family to come visit you in the US, they might have a better chance of a bright future having escaped Canada in its current state.
We'll see if he actually does it or if he's just like Blackburn and talks a good game while serving the enemy with action.
I wish I could upvote you more than once! Blackburn is dead to me. No one is stupid enough to do what she did. That leaves intentional malice as her only possible motivation.
It is because of how simple-minded too many people are. They forget someone sold them out just a few short months ago. The powers that be offer limited choices knowing that, psychologically, people are more likely to pick one. They ensure all options are bad for the people and good for the criminals. As expected, many simple-minded citizens then pick their perceived lesser evil from the proffered selection. We have to remind them CONSTANTLY to reject the full spectrum of criminal traitors and advance true patriotic Americans. If there are no patriotic Americans available for a certain office, then find one or run yourself!
She DOES NOT mean well unless your belief is that she is a complete moron. She exposed herself as a complete fake. She clearly only agreed to support the rightful victor because she KNEW she had an out in the planned fake insurrection. That is the most logical explanation. Actions speak louder than words. Blackburn is a traitor.
Yeah, Blackburn TALKS a good game. That is the extent of it. She was claiming she was going to stand up for Trump and oppose certifying the false results only to fold in the face of the fake insurrection. Even if the insurrection were real, what does it have to do with correcting a completely corrupt, rigged election? Surely she isn't that stupid. So she must be a corrupt fake.
Uhm, no. The PCAP's were at the event. They're highly technical. You're welcome to capture the data from the videos he had running of the hexadecimal. The experts on-site are the ones who got to really analyze the data hands-on. The fact no one claimed the $5 million is the proof that Mike's data is legit.