Microsoft’s default font is at the center of a government corruption case

[Arsalan]

A feasible solution to Pakistan's governance problems does not exist, Sir.

So lets just give up, sit back, and criticize? At least we are contributing, right?
Besides, the question was that you too vouch for a single person to be solution to all our problems, don't you?

Let us concentrate on the many substantive issues raised by the JIT, since the font issue is not one, in comparison, and provably wrong, Sir. Even the originator of the font admits that it was possible to use the font when the document was allegedly written, since the TTF file was available.

Where have to originator said that sir?

 

[expert]

Apparently, the JIT has also referred to the fact that 4th February 2006 was a Saturday when a solicitor would not have been available.

 

[VCheng]

by justifying the use of font we are actually denying an expert opinion from UK (handwriting and Documents). As of my information n UK an expert witness is only authorised by the court. To achieve this status of expert witness people have to go a thorough scrutiny.

Sir, there is a difference between justifying the use of the font (which I am not) and showing that it is technically possible to have used that font for that document (which I am, because it is correct), as even admitted by the originator of the font. The TTF file of the font was available far before the commercial release by Microsoft. Fact.

But, it is only one aspect of authenticating the document, and even that document is only one aspect of a huge and complex indictment. There are more substantive questions to answer.

It is important to remain fair despite a blood rush to judge.

 

[Path-Finder]

Apparently, the JIT has also referred to the fact that 4th February 2006 was a Saturday when a solicitor would not have been available.

Hahaha

 

[VCheng]

Where have to originator said that sir?

"it would have been possible to create a document using Calibri in 2006"

https://www.dawn.com/news/1344685

Why did he use those words? Because the TTF file of the font was available, and it is not too difficult to copy over a TTF file into a specific folder to make it available in other versions of Windows applications. In fact, people harvested beta releases for those very files and shared them widely.

Apparently, the JIT has also referred to the fact that 4th February 2006 was a Saturday when a solicitor would not have been available.

Tenuous, at best. It is up to a solicitor when to work.

 

[friendly_troll96]

Woww, your hunger for attention has no limits! Ask mods, they will tell you if these accounts are from same person or no.

Attention from single-celled organisms like you?

 

[Bab-e-Khyber]

I wonder who was the person that thought about what font that document was written in and when that font was released.

 

[Arsalan]

"it would have been possible to create a document using Calibri in 2006"

https://www.dawn.com/news/1344685

Why did he use those words? Because the TTF file of the font was available, and it is not too difficult to copy over a TTF file into a specific folder to make it available in other versions of Windows applications. In fact, people harvested beta releases for those very files and shared them widely.



Tenuous, at best. It is up to a solicitor when to work.

OHH COME ONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

From the whole article you choose to pick up four words and base an argument on that totally discarding what the whole other article was about????

You are better than that!!

Its a beta version, meant for IT freaks
It is unlikely that some one will cope font code from there for OFFICIAL DOC
Not sure when was even beta version launched

THERE ARE A DOZEN SUCH REFERENCES AND WE ALL KNOW THAT IT IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT MARYAM(or the guy typing it) IS FOUND TO BE A GEEK WHO GOT THAT BETA VERSION COPIED THE TEXT FROM THERE FOR AN OFFICIAL DOC.

Grabbing at straws!!

 

[Finer]

OHH COME ONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

From the whole article you choose to pick up four words and base an argument on that totally discarding what the whole other article was about????

You are better than that!!

Its a beta version, meant for IT freaks
It is unlikely that some one will cope font code from there for OFFICIAL DOC
Not sure when was even beta version launched

THERE ARE A DOZEN SUCH REFERENCES AND WE ALL KNOW THAT IT IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT MARYAM(or the guy typing it) IS FOUND TO BE A GEEK WHO GOT THAT BETA VERSION COPIED THE TEXT FROM THERE FOR AN OFFICIAL DOC.

Grabbing at straws!!

I think Syed Ali Haider is trying to establish that the loophole is there. Beta version is enough to make the case and they could argue that they got the documented through the professional IT typists on the font readily available through the beta versions.

If the loophole is there, then the case can be argued.

PMLN narrative might be questionable, and their documents on the Calibri font opens for many questions but i expect them to use the loophole which i mentioned above can be argued even if the case looks weak but not impossible.

 

[VCheng]

OHH COME ONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

From the whole article you choose to pick up four words and base an argument on that totally discarding what the whole other article was about????

You are better than that!!

Its a beta version, meant for IT freaks
It is unlikely that some one will cope font code from there for OFFICIAL DOC
Not sure when was even beta version launched

THERE ARE A DOZEN SUCH REFERENCES AND WE ALL KNOW THAT IT IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT MARYAM(or the guy typing it) IS FOUND TO BE A GEEK WHO GOT THAT BETA VERSION COPIED THE TEXT FROM THERE FOR AN OFFICIAL DOC.

Grabbing at straws!!

I have always said that the font issue is not substantive, as it can be easily shown in court to be possible to use that particular font on the date the document is supposed to have been created. Very easily, in fact. All it takes is one small, public TTF file to be copied into a folder. That is why what I quoted above is important.

The substantive issues lie elsewhere, and that is where the prosecution is better focused. Besides, there is plenty of other evidence. Why taint it with something trivial and demonstrably false?

 

[Arsalan]

I have always said that the font issue is not substantive, as it can be easily shown in court to be possible to use that particular font on the date the document is supposed to have been created. Very easily, in fact. All it takes is one small, public TTF file to be copied into a folder. That is why what I quoted above is important.

The substantive issues lie elsewhere, and that is where the prosecution is better focused. Besides, there is plenty of other evidence. Why taint it with some trivial and demonstrably false?

Well dear that is what YOU have said and frankly speaking, to me the Font issue is not the main point anyway. It is just a stupid mistake and that is why it is being talked about so much, just because it is ridiculous and stupid!! The problem for NS lies elsewhere. HOWEVER, lets not say that the originator have claimed that the font could have been used earlier. I mean, read that article, i am not so sure if choosing just these four words from that whole article is justified. Rest have no doubts that i can see that there are much bigger problems than this font issue for NS and Co.

 

[VCheng]

Well dear that is what YOU have said and frankly speaking, to me the Font issue is not the main point anyway. It is just a stupid mistake and that is why it is being talked about so much, just because it is ridiculous and stupid!! The problem for NS lies elsewhere. HOWEVER, lets not say that the originator have claimed that the font could have been used earlier. I mean, read that article, i am not so sure if choosing just these four words from that whole article is justified. Rest have no doubts that i can see that there are much bigger problems than this font issue for NS and Co.

But the originator did accept the fact.

We both agree that the real issues lie elsewhere.

 

[Solomon2]

I have always said that the font issue is not substantive, as it can be easily shown in court to be possible to use that particular font on the date the document is supposed to have been created. Very easily, in fact. All it takes is one small, public TTF file to be copied into a folder. That is why what I quoted above is important.

Possible, yes. I used to download TTF fonts for personal and business purposes. But I wouldn't have bothered to download Calibri, since it was so similar to the fonts already available. That's why it's not very believable that a business document created in 2006 would be using Calibri. Especially since once the document was transferred to another computer either that computer would have to download Calibri or the next "nearest" font would be chosen by Word instead - and that wasn't always the most reliable things, since sometimes something totally odd would pop out.

 

[Arsalan]

But the originator did accept the fact.

We both agree that the real issues lie elsewhere.

Only if we ignore what the originator said in the full article, select the few words start saying that only these are the words that are important. I am not going to do a Nawaz Sharif here on this

And yeah, REAL PROBLEM FOR NS lies elsewhere.

 

[VCheng]

Possible, yes. I used to download TTF fonts for personal and business purposes. But I wouldn't have bothered to download Calibri, since it was so similar to the fonts already available. That's why it's not very believable that a business document created in 2006 would be using Calibri. Especially since once the document was transferred to another computer either that computer would have to download Calibri or the next "nearest" font would be chosen by Word instead - and that wasn't always the most reliable things, since sometimes something totally odd would pop out.

The fact that the forensic expert was demonstrably wrong in at least one aspect of the assessment may be important for credibility. Possibly.