I think most of us here have said that what Hyborian_Jones claims is theoretically possible, just highly unlikely. But so far, we haven’t heard or seen any evidence supporting that claim. The absurdity of his claim lies in the complete lack of evidence.

Imagine this is a court of law (because, as I said above, this is basically a case of Hyborian_Jones accusing Microsoft of committing a crime). We’ve heard the defendant’s statement. The prosecutor says “They did it! Some random people online also say Microsoft did it!” The only hard evidence the prosecutor presents is a hard drive with corrupted data. How do you think the jury would react?

Now, to convince the jury, Hyborian_Jones would need evidence that his hard drive was actually sabotaged by Microsoft. That could be done by having the hard drive investigated by a cyber-forensics group unaffiliated with Microsoft. It would probably be a costly service, but imagine if Hyborian_Jones is right - the court case would make him rich and famous, more than enough to compensate for the cost of the investigation. All it takes is the courage to take the gamble and get the hard drive inspected.

Hard drives do get damaged. That could be caused by malware, or electric spikes, or overheating, or a number of reasons, including a glitch in the OS. Is there any reason, without making a thorough investigation - or, in fact, any kind of investigation beyond asking a group of non-professionals for their opinions (as most gamers are not actually cyber-forensics professionals, no matter how much they’d like to think otherwise), to so adamantly claim that the cause was malicious intent?

2 Likes