IJAZAH PALSU JOKO WIDODO BERDASARKAN ANALISA JENIS FONT DAN OPERATING SYSTEM

Summary

The transcript discusses accusations against Indonesian President Joko Widodo regarding the authenticity of his university degree. The speaker argues that the degree is likely fake, citing digital evidence such as font types that were not available at the time the degree was supposedly issued. The speaker highlights discrepancies in the historical timeline of operating systems, particularly pointing out that the font used in the degree was not available until years after its issuance. The video also critiques legal and judicial shortcomings in addressing the issue, emphasizing the importance of digital literacy in court decisions.

Takeaways

• 😀 The speaker argues that claims about President Joko Widodo's diploma being fake are baseless and must be proven by those making the accusation.
• 😀 The principle of 'actor incumbit probatio' is highlighted, meaning that those who claim something must prove it, especially when accusing someone of wrongdoing.
• 😀 There is criticism of the legal process where, despite accusations, Joko Widodo was expected to prove his diploma was genuine, rather than those accusing him proving it was fake.
• 😀 The speaker discusses the historical timeline of computer operating systems and font technologies, pointing out that the fonts used in the diploma could not have existed in 1985.
• 😀 The key argument is that 'Times New Roman,' used in the diploma, was not available in operating systems until 1992, thus making it impossible for a 1985 diploma to have used that font.
• 😀 The speaker emphasizes the technological limitations of the 1980s, such as the pixelated nature of fonts in early operating systems, contrasting it with the smooth fonts of later systems.
• 😀 A detailed comparison between old operating systems like DOS and early Windows versions is used to illustrate the technical discrepancies in the diploma's font.
• 😀 There is mention of the specific digital footprints of the fonts, which can be traced to later systems, thus showing the diploma could not be authentic from 1985.
• 😀 The speaker calls for transparency and honesty from both UGM (University of Gadjah Mada) and President Joko Widodo, urging them to acknowledge the diploma as likely being forged.
• 😀 The speaker reflects on the broader issue of digital manipulation and the lack of understanding among judges about the implications of digital evidence in legal cases.

Q & A

What is the primary allegation discussed in the script regarding Joko Widodo's education?

The primary allegation discussed in the script is that Joko Widodo's diploma is a forgery, with claims that it was printed using fonts and technology not available in 1985, when the diploma was supposedly issued.

How does the script argue that the diploma is a forgery?

The argument is based on the analysis of the font used on the diploma. Specifically, the Times New Roman font, which was only included in Windows 3.1, released in 1992, is claimed to have been used on a document dated 1985, making the diploma appear fraudulent.

What is the significance of the Times New Roman font in the argument?

The Times New Roman font is central to the argument because it was not available in 1985. It was first introduced in Windows 3.1 in 1992, and its presence on the diploma raises doubts about the authenticity of the document.

How does the script critique the Indonesian legal system in handling the diploma forgery claim?

The script criticizes the Indonesian legal system, particularly judges, for lacking digital literacy and failing to properly assess digital evidence, such as font analysis, in cases like this. The argument is that judges often rely on traditional methods and fail to understand the technical aspects of digital manipulation.

What is the 'actor incumbit probat' principle mentioned in the script?

The 'actor incumbit probat' principle is a legal concept that means the burden of proof lies with the party making the accusation. In this case, those claiming Joko Widodo’s diploma is fake are required to prove it, rather than Joko Widodo being forced to prove its authenticity.

How does the script differentiate the type of font used in Joko Widodo’s diploma from fonts available in 1985?

The script points out that the font used in Joko Widodo’s diploma, specifically Times New Roman, was not available in 1985. Instead, the system at the time would have used pixelated fonts from older operating systems, such as MS-DOS, which were far less advanced than the smooth fonts available in later versions of Windows.

What role does the UGM (Gadjah Mada University) play in the controversy?

UGM is mentioned in the script as the institution that supposedly issued Joko Widodo’s diploma. The script criticizes UGM for defending the authenticity of the diploma despite the font and technological discrepancies that suggest it may be a forgery.

What historical background is provided regarding operating systems to support the forgery claim?

The historical background includes a discussion of the release dates for Windows operating systems and their features. It highlights that in 1985, Windows had not yet released versions that included the Times New Roman font, making it impossible for a diploma printed at that time to have used that font.

How does the script explain the issue of digital manipulation in the context of the legal case?

The script discusses how digital manipulation, such as altering fonts on a document, can go undetected by judges who lack the technical knowledge to recognize digital evidence. It criticizes the judicial system for not understanding or properly addressing these modern forms of evidence.

What is the significance of the number sequence on the diploma, and how does the script question its validity?

The number sequence on the diploma (1120) is questioned in the script because it appears irregular compared to other diplomas, which typically follow a standardized numbering system with clear classifications. The script suggests that the irregular number raises further doubts about the authenticity of the diploma.