![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
I can probably put together an OLOG for Clinton's email server scandal. Basically, to have a credible case one has to prove both intention and harm. Given the known leaks from NSA (Snowden) and State/Defense departments (WikiLeaks), it would be really difficult to prove harm. In other words, the pullback won't work.
In general, we need to figure out how to use OLOGs for showing a logical or any other kind of problem within a given situation, i.e. a diagram should make it clear that required arrows don't commute. Another way to look at it would be to consider a bunch of proof statements provided in a required order.
upd: another interesting aspect of the server scandal is the timing of the hack relative to the events covered in the emails. If the hack occurred after the events or after the earlier leaks there's no harm.
In general, we need to figure out how to use OLOGs for showing a logical or any other kind of problem within a given situation, i.e. a diagram should make it clear that required arrows don't commute. Another way to look at it would be to consider a bunch of proof statements provided in a required order.
upd: another interesting aspect of the server scandal is the timing of the hack relative to the events covered in the emails. If the hack occurred after the events or after the earlier leaks there's no harm.