Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 14 2012 @ 07:06 PM EDT |
This might have been sloppy note-taking on my part or maybe it really did come
out that way. Either way, Dr. August's intent was clearly to say he didn't
detect any inaccuracies with Bornstein or McFadden's testimony.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: hardmath on Monday, May 14 2012 @ 07:47 PM EDT |
This is legal shorthand for asking the same question ("did you
detect any inaccuracies...") about a different person/object.
So "no" was the right answer, as far as we can tell from the
reporting.
---
"Prolog is an efficient programming language because it is a very stupid theorem
prover." -- Richard O'Keefe[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Ian Al on Tuesday, May 15 2012 @ 04:48 AM EDT |
.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 20 2012 @ 05:34 AM EDT |
If August was being logical, "No" to "And the same with
Andy McFadden?",
means he did find an inaccuracy in McFadden's
answers, namely the one place
where he gave the wrong yes/no
answer to an Oracle trick question.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|