Now we get the hurt & huffy routine, just an excuse, a way out, a way to keep on believing what you want to believe, still deceived by Werepossum & the rest of the right wing noise machine.
If you want to turn this into an insult contest, I am out.
Now we get the hurt & huffy routine, just an excuse, a way out, a way to keep on believing what you want to believe, still deceived by Werepossum & the rest of the right wing noise machine.
Here's another one you may have missed, Matt. I encourage you to read the section I mention, then tell me again how I don't know anything about drives.
Two points: First, when I posted that I did so with no insults, overt or implied. You apparently chose not to respond. That rather undermines your insinuation that you're interested in productive discussion. Second, you have an interesting double standard on insults. Not only do you throw them freely in general, but in this specific case it was you insulting me by impugning my knowledge and honesty. If you are now truly interested in moving past that into productive discussion, it would customarily begin by you apologizing for that behavior and acknowledging your insults were baseless.I actually saw that and even read the PDF, They went above and beyond the call of duty in attempting to recover the data. If you want to discuss the topics I am more than willing to do that. If you want to just throw jabs in the way of insults, then you can look for someone else.
I'm not attacking Lerner for lying to Congress. I'm attacking Lerner for using the full might of the US government to disadvantage conservatives.
Two points: First, when I posted that I did so with no insults, overt or implied. You apparently chose not to respond. That rather undermines your insinuation that you're interested in productive discussion. Second, you have an interesting double standard on insults. Not only do you throw them freely in general, but in this specific case it was you insulting me by impugning my knowledge and honesty. If you are now truly interested in moving past that into productive discussion, it would customarily begin by you apologizing for that behavior and acknowledging your insults were baseless.
I don't actually expect you to do so; it is quite rare to see that level of civility and integrity in P&N. Nonetheless, your failure to do so exposes your feigned outrage over insults as empty posturing, a dodge to avoid admitting you erred. The choice is yours.
IronyI expected no less. I gave you an opportunity to rise above the petty bullshit and you chose not to.
Quick update: the judge requested more information from the IRS. He asked about any efforts to recover mail from other sources, e.g., Blackberry mail, and asked questions about how individual components like Lerenr's hard drive are tracked, and how their identity can be verified since the IRS does not tag them. He also asked for more information about external companies that provide the IRS with "degaussing" services. The IRS has until 8/22 to respond.We finally have that detailed technical testimony, direct from the IRS technicians involved. It comes in the form of sworn affidavits, submitted in the Judicial Watch lawsuit: http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Judicial-Watch-v.-IRS-01559.pdf
The second statement is the most interesting one, from the forensics technician (John Minsek, page 8 of the .pdf). I was surprised at how far he went to try to recover Lerner's drive. Not only did he use that "specialized hardware" I mentioned, he actually did use a "clean room" of sorts (clean box?), and tried replacing both the controller card and the heads, carefully ensuring he had an identical model and firmware revision according to his testimony.
His efforts were unsuccessful. He was experiencing some sort of controller error that kept it from ever entering a ready state. I don't know if that indicates a more serious hardware problem, or is merely that "luck of the draw" issue I mention when trying to swap controller cards. Either way, he was ultimately unable to recover any data at all from the drive. It does show that the problem was beyond merely writing bad data to the drive, or reformatting it.
Finally, at one point I speculated that when the IRS tech said the drive was "scratched", he might have meant he wiped the drive and not that it was physically damaged. I was wrong about that. (This is related to me not expecting the IRS to try a clean room recovery.) Today's affidavits report that a drive platter was physically scored. They also confirm that there was no evidence of intentional physical damage.
Anyway, aside from the implications for this story, I found the second statement interesting in its own right. It is quite detailed. It's worth a read if you'd like insight into advanced drive recovery tactics.
Seems like a very fair an balanced approach on his part. Doesn't seem to be swayed by the posturing and BS on either side.Quick update: the judge requested more information from the IRS. He asked about any efforts to recover mail from other sources, e.g., Blackberry mail, and asked questions about how individual components like Lerenr's hard drive are tracked, and how their identity can be verified since the IRS does not tag them. He also asked for more information about external companies that provide the IRS with "degaussing" services. The IRS has until 8/22 to respond.
Seems like a very fair an balanced approach on his part. Doesn't seem to be swayed by the posturing and BS on either side.
So posturing and BS is OK in moderation?As if the posturing & BS weren't almost entirely one sided.
When all else fails, invoke false equivalency.
Quick update: the judge requested more information from the IRS. He asked about any efforts to recover mail from other sources, e.g., Blackberry mail, and asked questions about how individual components like Lerenr's hard drive are tracked, and how their identity can be verified since the IRS does not tag them. He also asked for more information about external companies that provide the IRS with "degaussing" services. The IRS has until 8/22 to respond.
So posturing and BS is OK in moderation?
Is that like "only a little bit of the old ultra violence"?
Deguasse a hard drive. Interesting.
It's a bulk erasure method using a very strong electromagnet. Insert drive. push button, light turns red, timer cycles, light returns to green. remove drive. magnetically stored information is just gone. They probably have big ones, batch feed. They're widely used, or were, by law & accounting firms to protect sensitive information on EOL drives. That's before they go out to be shredded into teensy pieces for recycling.
You missed his point. The degaussing occurs BEFORE the drives are sent out to be physically destroyed. Belt and suspenders thingy to prevent raw tax information from being readable.In the world I work in, hard drives are ground up in a big grinder. I'm well aware of what degaussing is, I just never heard of a hard drive degausser. You either have software that over writes the data multiple times or you destroy the drive.
No we won't. Peons aren't allowed.Judicial Watch is also now claiming that the govt has backups of all of Lerner's (and others) emails.
I.e., there were never any missing emails.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/backups-for-missing-lois-lerner-irs-emails/
We'll see.
Fern
It's a bulk erasure method using a very strong electromagnet. Insert drive. push button, light turns red, timer cycles, light returns to green. remove drive. magnetically stored information is just gone. They probably have big ones, batch feed. They're widely used, or were, by law & accounting firms to protect sensitive information on EOL drives. That's before they go out to be shredded into teensy pieces for recycling.
Judicial Watch is also now claiming that the govt has backups of all of Lerner's (and others) emails.
I.e., there were never any missing emails.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/backups-for-missing-lois-lerner-irs-emails/
We'll see.
Fern
Yes, except Judicial Watch has a long history of pushing accusations that turn out to be empty hyperbole. At best I suspect their attorney misunderstood what the Justice Department lawyer said ... in a way that lets them make the most sensational claim, of course. Let's get a named source within Justice who will corroborate this story.Judicial Watch is also now claiming that the govt has backups of all of Lerner's (and others) emails.
I.e., there were never any missing emails.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/backups-for-missing-lois-lerner-irs-emails/
We'll see.
Fern
Bet it wouldn't be if the information to be retreived could be used against a political enemy.Heh. "The Obama administration attorneys said that this back-up system would be too onerous to search."