this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2025
688 points (98.9% liked)

People Twitter

8786 readers
2474 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] calliope@retrolemmy.com 21 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (3 children)

Has anyone actually tried this?

I did. I checked both the “Masseuses” and the “Contact Book,” (mentioned in the X comments as being not redacted correctly), and they seem to be redacted properly. I’ve tried 3 PDF readers, but I’d be curious what actually works.

You have to scroll a while in the original comments to find someone who actually tried it, and it didn’t work for them either.

It’s hilarious that everyone is just believing it though.

Yay, someone else is actually covering it!

[–] kingofras@lemmy.world 26 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I’ve done all 18,000 pdfs. This must have happened in one document. The vast majority are redacted correctly.

This looks like a disinformation campaign to distract from other stuff. “Some people are saying there are word in the document that should not be in the documents, so we have to wonder how they got there”.

The entire thing is a classic disinformation campaign. Right before Christmas. Multiple tranche release. Then pullbacks and rerelease. Maximum confusion. Make sure nobody knows who to trust.

Fun fact: this technique was developed in Russia.

[–] calliope@retrolemmy.com 9 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (2 children)

Maybe I’m wrong but the whole thing seemed like bullshit. No other news organization I can find has picked this story up, after ten hours. Obviously no one can replicate the results.

About thirty minutes ago, USA Today published an article that Trump’s name is in plain text several times in documents released today. No redaction copy and paste necessary.

People are eating it up though.

The incompetence is… here! 😱

[–] kingofras@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago

*has always been here

[–] QueenHawlSera@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 hours ago

Eating it up in what way?

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago

Note you have to paste into something that doesn't recognize the highlighting. Notepad used to work.

[–] Hegar@fedia.io 6 points 13 hours ago

Yeah there's been some wild stuff coming out but this is implausible. Actual journalists who regularly deal with redacted docs must've been through most of it by now.

If this were true i don't think would be a tweet, it would be an uncontainable story.

Edit: well it seems to have become an uncontainable story, though it's a small amount of files.