The Age of Simulation

Questions, speculations & updates on the techniques and nature of media fakery

Re: The Age of Simulation

Postby Anders on November 10th, 2016, 2:37 pm

bongostaple » November 10th, 2016, 2:23 pm wrote:I really don't think it's about the tech at the core of things. It's about psychologically manipulating individuals and groups through information. The tech allows more ways to execute an operation today, but does not need to be way beyond what we are aware of at the moment, for the simple reason that if you show a video clip on the television news and tell people what they are seeing, they will believe it as if they saw it with their own eyes. Black Ops Wizard Tech just isn't necessary to fool the majority of people, and the remainder, who at various times are not fooled, are castigated as conspiracy nutters by the majority. That's because the majority have been told what to think about people like that. So not only do psyops use people's gullibility against them, they use it against us unbelievers too. We are in such a minority that the approach works very well, and has done for a very very long time....

That's a good point. It's enough to use ordinary technology to fool most people. Just look at the live plane crash into the WTC 2 tower I think it was. Very crude 2D computer graphics silhouette of a plane.

But when it comes to simulating Edward Snowden, then they had to wait until 2013 when the public technology was good enough. They have to use ordinary technology to make even experts confused about who could have done the fakery.
Anders
Member
 
Posts: 84
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 9:20 am

Re: The Age of Simulation

Postby bongostaple on November 10th, 2016, 4:22 pm

Fair point about Snowden - but I would suggest the main reason why they have to use ordinary technology is because there isn't any 'secret tech'. The classic urban myth that's been around for decades is along the lines of 'the military always have tech 50 years ahead of civilians'. I call bullshit on that one - it's great to have the general population wasting their time looking into 'UFO cover-ups' and other dead-end activities. And that also gives great territory for DBA operations against groups of people talking about what's really going on. The recent Flat Earth DBA op for instance.

The US military spend millions upon millions of dollars sitting in the desert pretending to make a weapon so powerful, and so deadly, that even I spent the 1980s quietly shitting myself about the horrors of nuclear war. Which was the whole point of the Cold War. Look at how NASA got started - USAF with the X-planes, Chuck Yeager etc went higher and higher with their rocket planes until.... well what, exactly? Completely losing interest in space and handing the torch to a civilian organisation? I rather think not. More likely, the USAF worked out we cannot go any higher. Not possible. So the fantasists took it all over. If even Low Earth Orbit was possible, USAF would have been working out how to send stuff up and come back down so damned fast that it wouldn't even need to have explosives or nukes on board. But they didn't.

If we choose to believe in the fantasy of nuclear weapons, then we would have to accept that they are the only weapons ever in history that military forces have exercised complete restraint over the usage of for decades, because they are 'too powerful'. That would be a level of restraint never evidenced by military forces in respect to any other weapon whatsoever. Man invents something. It's dangerous. Man makes weapons and uses them.

The 'big secret' about 'black-budget tech' is that there isn't any.

edit: typo
bongostaple
Member
 
Posts: 58
Joined: October 4th, 2016, 12:53 pm

Re: The Age of Simulation

Postby Anders on November 10th, 2016, 5:35 pm

bongostaple » November 10th, 2016, 4:22 pm wrote:Fair point about Snowden - but I would suggest the main reason why they have to use ordinary technology is because there isn't any 'secret tech'.

I believe there is a hidden power who has more advanced tech and knowledge than the public community. For example Einstein's relativity seems to be a deliberate hoax to divert the public community into false research.

But at least in the fakery PsyOps I think only standard technology is used. The scary thing is that public computer capacity today is enough to pull off a lot of simulated events. Maybe one of the purposes of Snowden was as a pilot project/proof of concept for some future even larger fakery. Yikes.
Anders
Member
 
Posts: 84
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 9:20 am

Re: The Age of Simulation

Postby simonshack on November 10th, 2016, 8:34 pm

bongostaple » November 10th, 2016, 3:22 pm wrote:Fair point about Snowden - but I would suggest the main reason why they have to use ordinary technology is because there isn't any 'secret tech'. The classic urban myth that's been around for decades is along the lines of 'the military always have tech 50 years ahead of civilians'. I call bullshit on that one - it's great to have the general population wasting their time looking into 'UFO cover-ups' and other dead-end activities. And that also gives great territory for DBA operations against groups of people talking about what's really going on. The recent Flat Earth DBA op for instance.

The US military spend millions upon millions of dollars sitting in the desert pretending to make a weapon so powerful, and so deadly, that even I spent the 1980s quietly shitting myself about the horrors of nuclear war. Which was the whole point of the Cold War. Look at how NASA got started - USAF with the X-planes, Chuck Yeager etc went higher and higher with their rocket planes until.... well what, exactly? Completely losing interest in space and handing the torch to a civilian organisation? I rather think not. More likely, the USAF worked out we cannot go any higher. Not possible. So the fantasists took it all over. If even Low Earth Orbit was possible, USAF would have been working out how to send stuff up and come back down so damned fast that it wouldn't even need to have explosives or nukes on board. But they didn't.

If we choose to believe in the fantasy of nuclear weapons, then we would have to accept that they are the only weapons ever in history that military forces have exercised complete restraint over the usage of for decades, because they are 'too powerful'. That would be a level of restraint never evidenced by military forces in respect to any other weapon whatsoever. Man invents something. It's dangerous. Man makes weapons and uses them.

The 'big secret' about 'black-budget tech' is that there isn't any.

edit: typo


Dear Bongostaple,

I have to say that I simply love this post of yours. It's fabulously crisp and clear. -_-
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6405
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: The Age of Simulation

Postby CitronBleu on November 10th, 2016, 9:37 pm



full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M

The character's head and neck movements seem jagged or unnatural when viewed from the back - the motion is not fluid and appears to freeze or stop too rapidly.

an example at [21:48 - 21:52]
CitronBleu
DELETED THEIR OWN POSTS :(
 
Posts: 264
Joined: August 29th, 2012, 8:45 pm

Re: The Age of Simulation

Postby hoi.polloi on November 10th, 2016, 11:28 pm

CitronBleu, thanks for pointing that out. I do believe it's always critical to look for the seams in any given simulation, because there are always seams. It can be a temporal seam, like cutting/editing, a compositing seam or even just a seam where the forehead part merges with the lower brow/eyebrow part.

Seams are also the weak point and where every artist would have to work especially hard to correct. This is why I think they sometimes ignore the failures "in the middle" or "in the open". They have a budget for both but they may delegate too much work to making a fiction sit in a simulated reality and miss something obvious due to time or other constraints.

I am sorry I am not a big believer in the "revelation of the method". They used to call that laziness or goofs. Every production has them.


Anders » November 10th, 2016, 4:35 pm wrote:
bongostaple » November 10th, 2016, 4:22 pm wrote:Fair point about Snowden - but I would suggest the main reason why they have to use ordinary technology is because there isn't any 'secret tech'.

I believe there is a hidden power who has more advanced tech and knowledge than the public community. For example Einstein's relativity seems to be a deliberate hoax to divert the public community into false research.

But at least in the fakery PsyOps I think only standard technology is used. The scary thing is that public computer capacity today is enough to pull off a lot of simulated events. Maybe one of the purposes of Snowden was as a pilot project/proof of concept for some future even larger fakery. Yikes.


Another way to look at it is: "advanced" technology can also just be more money.

You or I do not have the money to have one hundred thousand computers crunching data on an image, problem or simulation. The government's contractors do.

So, to me, "advanced technology" can get over the economic barrier that most of us have when facing state of the art, efficient versions of what we already have in the public.

A hundred i7 chips at work are better than one i5 chip. That is why I think it is wrong to always say, "Well, if the public can't do it, neither can the military." We don't have their resources. We don't have to imagine fancy things, though we can be sure they do experiment with their RAND/MITRE investment capital in private industry.

Our failure of imagination is sometimes in just the amount of money they have. And our failure to understand mistakes is often because we are not the money movers. We don't create their budget so we don't have to explain to their superiors, as they might, why a certain amount of money only produced a certain quality that their bosses will not give any more to.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4850
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: The Age of Simulation

Postby Anders on November 11th, 2016, 9:38 am

Here is one of the supposed live interviews with Edward Snowden:


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3svbmlMALM

The presenter says: "... this event through a live stream." Is he telling the truth? Yes, the stream is probably live. Notice that he didn't say that the content in the stream is live. Which means that Snowden can have been generated beforehand and the questions prepared to match the Snowden simulation. My current hypothesis is that Snowden is a CGI character and that he is presented in a truthful (although deceptive) way in order for them to remain within legal limits. Remember, having legal backing gives them strength whereas doing things illegally makes them vulnerable.

I did a new Google search for "edward snowden simulation" and this time I found an article that describes Snowden as being a CGI simulation:

"Edward Snowden is what ‘the powers that be’ call this simulated human. For those who class this CGI entity as a hero, you need to wake up. You only need to look at the neck to see that it doesn’t resemble reality in any way.

Compare the skin on the torso and lower neck to the color of the face and upper neck; you will see the obvious mismatch. To me, it looks like the head has been attached to a different body." -- Full article: http://mediahoaxes.tumblr.com/post/7463 ... at-be-call
Anders
Member
 
Posts: 84
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 9:20 am

Re: The Age of Simulation

Postby bongostaple on November 11th, 2016, 10:27 pm

The NASA budget for 2016 was I think just under 20 billion dollars. Bearing in mind they don't actually go into space, 20 billion buys a lot of front and employs lots of pliant employees to keep up appearances, and still have lots left over to line the pockets of the suppliers, who themselves only spend enough of that to pretend they are doing stuff for real, and pass the change on to the next companies in line.

Homeland Security have about double the budget of NASA, but there is a visible amount of infrastructure that needs money spending on it, loads of employees (pliant again), so plenty of change there.

This kind of money buys a lot of people who will do what they are told.

Of course, I am assuming that faking stuff is cheaper than doing real things. Probably a safe assumption. Bearing in mind the layered nature of fake orgs, lots of the people in them think they are doing the real thing. The next layer up could well be people who know they are participating in fakery, but they have been convinced by their higher-ups that what they are doing serves some higher purpose, and they are doing it 'for the greater good'. These folks are being psychologically manipulated just as much as the general public.

I know of someone who is almost certainly in the 'greater good' category, but I will wait until I'm not working for the same company before I finger him here. Even then, I may err on the side of caution as he appears to have been fast-tracked to a very senior level without having to have done very much real work, over the last few years. Looks awfully like a reward to me.

(Simon - thanks for your kind words)

(edit - typo)
bongostaple
Member
 
Posts: 58
Joined: October 4th, 2016, 12:53 pm

Re: The Age of Simulation

Postby Flabbergasted on July 21st, 2017, 2:39 pm

Selfie with the SnowBot

Image
A TED attendee snaps a photo with Edward Snowden, appearing on the screen of a telepresence robot. Photo: Bret Hartman
http://fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?i ... edf.479479

The telepresence robot animated by the Snowden sim is...
...a wheeled contraption called a BeamPro, a flat-screen monitor that stands atop a pair of legs, five-foot-two in all, with a camera that acts as a swiveling Cyclops eye. Inevitably, people call it the “Snowbot”.

They couldn´t have chosen a more fitting name!

...Undeniably, it’s a gimmick: a tool in the campaign to advance Snowden’s cause.

...Snowden [...] hopes to prove that the internet can overcome the power of governments, the strictures of exile, and isolation. It all amounts to an unprecedented act of defiance, a genuine enemy of the state carousing in plain view.

...The idea that Snowden is still walking the American streets, virtually or otherwise, is infuriating to his former employers in the U.S. intelligence community.

Oh my, I bet they are foaming at the mouth!

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... robot.html
http://blog.ted.com/snowden-selfies-and ... s-ted2014/
Flabbergasted
Member
 
Posts: 669
Joined: November 12th, 2012, 1:19 am

Re: The Age of Simulation

Postby Kham on July 21st, 2017, 8:05 pm

A monitor on a rolling stand is now called a robot

Thanks for the post, Flabbergasted. The media didn't forget the trans-humanism content. I found it interesting that the article calls the 2 support bars that hold up the screen as Snowbot's 'legs'. So Snowbot has 2 legs and can travel on wheels.
Image

So much robot nonsense when all Snowsim needed to do to be mobile was someones cellphone and facetime or skype or google hangout. Well done trans-humanism for making something out of nothing.

In reality, I am imaging the real driver of the Snowbot to be nearby. That driver of the bot is probably also the one who chooses which programs to play. There is the 'watching tedtalks and seeming interested' program. There is the 'taking selfie with strangers' program, and let's not forget the 'walking with human' program where Snowbot is looking around and pretending to drive his own bot through convention centers and airports.
Kham
Member
 
Posts: 72
Joined: June 25th, 2015, 10:30 am

Re: The Age of Simulation

Postby hoi.polloi on July 23rd, 2017, 1:50 pm

Great points, K. I am not sure about how much the heady "transhumanist" agenda has really sunk in as the main thrust of the futurists' usual schemes, but I do think fear of such is a perfect trojan for the real problem here: Snowden could be anything these days. And it's not that hard or frightening to understand.

- just simply augmented reality make up on an actor's face
- a pre-rendered CGI character
- an AI "sim"

All of these are possibilities that are glaringly obvious to people following tech developments, but mass human experience with such tools has not yet caught up to reality. So they are dismissed as ludicrous.

It's like telling someone VR exists, or e-mail, and they laugh in your face as if you are describing a miracle. The population just doesn't quite have a grip on present changes yet.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4850
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Previous

Return to The Question of Fakery

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests