Those two aren't incompatible! When you discover financial fraud - in any context - you send the evidence that alerted you to the fraud to the police so they can build a prosecution case, and then cut off the money. Stopping the money flow doesn't stop anyone from prosecuting fraud that happened in the past.
What worries me is that neither of those are mentioned to have taken place.
And if they had I would expect more detailed 'proof' than the single simplest SQL query one could think of.
Or actually I wouldn't expect any public statements at all. Scoring quick political points is nowhere near worth endangering the legal cases. Which could not be anywhere close to even identifying the alleged fraudsters in such a short amount of time.
You seem quite happy to find reasons for something you expected to be true. Like I was happy to know he made a silly mistake with epochs.
Excited by this I quickly tried and unfortunately succeeded to falsify that information. Could you do me a favour and try the same with your read of events?
Skepticism is obviously going to be my first response.
I was arguing it should be yours as well.
And you seem to want to go off-topic, again, but what idiot would believe the U.S. government doesn't use SQL? The U.S. government is the direct cause of the creation of SQL.
I think you might be assuming I'm a different poster, though not sure.
I just thought that when debating whether the information provided by Musk was a simple SQL statement, and the general weight to put on it, the fact that he recently confidently stated that the government don't use SQL was a relevant bit of info to use when we weigh up alternative hypotheses.
He is a liar and cannot be trusted. He’s lied about his past, being caught saying that his wealth didn’t come from his family’s emerald mine. He lied about his long support for apartheid and his general racism. He’s been lying about full self driving for most of his tenure at Tesla. He lied about being a founder of Tesla. He lied about making Twitter better when he bought it and destroyed 75% of its value. And he’s lying about any fraud at SSA.
Ah sorry, I did confuse you with the other person I was talking to. That explains the shift in topics. Really whether it was SQL or not is still irrelevant, hence my rather sharp tone.
It doesn't endanger any future legal cases to post stats from the database. Governments have done such audits before and it never caused any issues for prosecution of specific cases.
What we're discussing here is a bunch of tweets, not a legal case put before a judge. Musk is often throwing around the word fraud to mean something like "we were told the money would be spent on wells in Africa but it's actually being given to newspapers" and similar things which probably wouldn't be considered fraud in a courtroom, but people know what he means.
I'm happy to double check specific claims, but I'm not sure what you're uncertain about. You're arguing that if you discover fraud you have to continuing giving the fraudsters money until the guy finally shows up in court? Or is found guilty? I don't quite know how or why I'd double check that because that's not how the law works and it would be silly if it did.
