this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2026
249 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

80863 readers
3525 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
249
Recreating uncensored Epstein PDFs from raw encoded attachments (neosmart.net)
submitted 8 hours ago by flango@lemmy.eco.br to c/technology@lemmy.world
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

There have been a lot of complaints about both the competency and the logic behind the latest Epstein archive release by the DoJ: from censoring the names of co-conspirators to censoring pictures of random women in a way that makes individuals look guiltier than they really are, forgetting to redact credentials that made it possible for all of Reddit to log into Epstein’s account and trample over all the evidence, and the complete ineptitude that resulted in most of the latest batch being corrupted thanks to incorrectly converted Quoted-Printable encoding artifacts, it’s safe to say that Pam Bondi’s DoJ did not put its best and brightest on this (admittedly gargantuan) undertaking. But the most damning evidence has all been thoroughly redacted… hasn’t it? Well, maybe not.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] realitista@lemmus.org 26 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

Yeah I read all that and he never even shared any unredacted docs.

[–] A_A@lemmy.world 15 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Craked ... unredacted, from them, here :

(( Mout Sinai Dubin breast center 2012 invitation form ... )) :
https://archive.org/details/dbc-12-one-page-invite-with-reply
as i explained in other comment here at OOP s' post

[–] realitista@lemmus.org 10 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Just an invitation to a party?

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 4 points 3 hours ago

A breast cancer party

[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Nobody ever has AFAIK.

Was this "poorly redacted" thing just a hoax from the outset? Perhaps even started by MAGA HQ to get us too exhausted by false and innocuous findings so that when the real paydirt hits the screens the swinging voters will be too jaded to care?

[–] TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 hours ago

No the poorly redacted ones were real, from the first release. They were not redacted by the DOJ, they were old court documents. Afaik all of them were also already released unredacted.