OK, look, the Paradyne thing wasn't meant to be an exact analogy. But
none the less, the thing it's being compared with is a site visit in
which tests were *not* *performed*.
The visitor supposedly verified that there was lots of nifty equipment
on site, but didn't see it actually do anything useful. (Or anyway
that's what your initial statements led one to believe.)
So, "millions of dollars" of *borrowed* (or rented) equipment in a
*borrowed* (or rented) lab, along with a few non-functional mockups,
could certainly have filled the bill ... based on what readers on this
list can glean from your emails.
If your acquaintance actually saw the things operating and producing
heat, then that's something else again -- but it's certainly not what I
understood you to say to start with.
And in point of fact without an exact description, we need to replace a
number of words throughout your description if we want it to be
something we can all agree on.
"They have many highly qualified professional scientists" --> "They had
at least two people who said they were scientists, and sounded
technically reasonable"
"They purchased millions of dollars of equipment" --> We don't have a
precise number, we need to remove the mantissa --> "They had some
dollars worth of equipment"
You get the point.
Oh, yes, I particularly liked this one: "He can easily tell they are
qualified." Darn, we could use a guy like that! To tell if someone's
qualified, it takes *us* a couple days of interviews, time spent poring
over their resume, and a reference check -- and sometimes we still blow
it and hire somebody who turns out to be a bozo!
On 11-12-21 04:35 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Yes. For long enough to get through the contract awards process,
and, as far as I can tell, for several years after that.
If Paradyne had delivered on time and on budget the fake would
never have been noticed.
The article says:
When Paradyne couldn't develop the computer in time for the
demonstration, it used one manufactured by another company but
presented it as its own, the prosecutors said.
In other words, they changed the face plates and logos. That was a
genuine working computer they showed but it was not their own. The
person examining this computer was not familiar with the competing
product. Presumably, this stolen computer processed the Social
Security data correctly.
This would be analogous to Defkalion demonstrating genuine cold fusion
reactors to experts, where they did not actually develop these
reactors. They stole them from Rossi or someone else. I will grant
that my contact would not be capable of seeing through this ploy.
Demonstrating fake reactors would be analogous to setting up a
cardboard box, telling the programmers that it is a computer and
expecting them to believe it.
- Jed
