Hacker News Reader

Nah, it supports the counter-example, so it's a counter-example example.

I'd say it refutes the counter-example. The court doesn't care about DKIM, they care about witness testimony.

DKIM might have convinced the witness sometimes though.

Courts typically do not care as much about what an expert witness thinks, as rather why they think it - and whether their reasons hold up enough that the conclusions they support should be accepted.

That is not quite correct. A court is undoubtedly interested in what an expert witness has to say.

It is the lawyers appearing before the court that may attempt to play the person not the ball, by variously undermining or bolstering their standing as an expert at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com