People always claimed this as a data leak vector but I've always been sceptical. Like just writing style and vocabulary is probably extremely shared among too many people to narrow it down much. (How people that you know could have written this reply?) The counter argument is that he had a very specific style in his mail so maybe this is a special case.

Stylometry is extremely sophisticated even with simple n-gram analysis. There's a demo of this that can easily pick out who you are on HN just based on a few paragraphs of your own writing, based on N-gram analysis.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33755016

You can also unironically spot most types of AI writing this way. The approaches based on training another transformer to spot "AI generated" content are wrong.

I'm pretty sure Epstein tried to meet with moot at least once: https://www.jmail.world/search?q=chris+poole

Reddit is also removing and shadowbannig such posts, but there's a community on https://lemmy.world/post/42440468

Are they being removed or replaced with more heavily redacted documents? There were definitely some victim names that slipped through the cracks that have since been redacted.

Initially under "Epstein Files Transparency Act (H.R.4405)" on https://www.justice.gov/epstein/doj-disclosures, all datasets had .zip links. I first saw that page when all but dataset 11 (or 10) had a .zip link. At one point this morning, all the .zip links were removed, now it seems like most are back again.

I think some of the released documents included images of victims, which where redacted. So it's not necessarily malicious removals

Did you take any steps to decrease the dimension size of images, if this increases the performance? I have not tried this as I have not peformed an OCR task like this with an LLM. I would be interested to know at what size the vlm cannot make out the details in text reliably.

Was on the frontpage yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46868759

The equal characters are due to poor handling of quoted-printable in email.

The author of gnus, Lars Ingebrigtsen, wrote a blog post explaining this. His post was on the HN front page today.

DeepSeek-V4-JEE

This is speculation but generally rules like this follow some sort of incident. e.g. Someone responds to a FOI request and accidentally discloses more information than desired due to metadata. So a blanket rule is instituted not to use a particular format.

Maybe they know more than we do. It may be possible to tamper with files at a deeper level. I wonder if it is also possible to use some sort of tampered compression algorithm that could mark images much like printers do with paper.

Another guess is that perhaps the step is a part of a multi-step sanitation process, and the last step(s) perform the bitmap operation.

> What is the legal basis for releasing the someone's private files and communications?

An act of congress, for one.

Also, AFAIK, federal privacy generally ends at death, as does criminal liability; so releasing government files from a federal investigation after death of the subject is generally within the realm of acceptable conduct.

I believe a literal Act of Congress…

It was passed into law by congress and signed by the president:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epstein_Files_Transparency_Act

I'd assume it was the nature of the case, and that discovery was done with him being dead.

Elite PDF File ring

We're in early February 2025 [edit:2026] and the article was written on Dec 23, 2025, which makes it less than two months old. I think it's ok not to include a year in the submission title in that case.

I personally understand a year in the submission as a warning that the article may not be up to date.