Simulated Faces (Which actors/parts/techniques involved?)

Questions, speculations & updates on the techniques and nature of media fakery
JLapage
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:38 pm

Simulated Faces (Which actors/parts/techniques involved?)

Unread post by JLapage »

[post deleted by JLapage]


NOTE FROM ADMIN:
This thread was created out of a need to address JLapage's controversial comparison of a "background character" sim to the face of famous celebrity actor Jim Carrey. His speculation was that parts of Jim Carrey's face were used for a somewhat trivial figure in the ongoing Egypt PsyOpera surrounding the Arab Spring (or are they one and the same?)

-hp
Last edited by JLapage on Sat Sep 14, 2013 10:37 am, edited 3 times in total.
MrSinclair
Member
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 1:29 am

Re: Egypt 'Revolution'- all the way to Libya 'War'

Unread post by MrSinclair »

Do you have a point to make or do you just like the photos of these two guys?
anonjedi2
Member
Posts: 860
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 5:50 am

Re: Egypt 'Revolution'- all the way to Libya 'War'

Unread post by anonjedi2 »

Please no goldbuggery on this forum!
JLapage
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Egypt 'Revolution'- all the way to Libya 'War'

Unread post by JLapage »

MrSinclair wrote:Do you have a point to make or do you just like the photos of these two guys?
Stevens as a vicsim may have been designed with some of the features of Jim Carrey.
MrSinclair
Member
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 1:29 am

Re: Egypt 'Revolution'- all the way to Libya 'War'

Unread post by MrSinclair »

JLapage wrote:
MrSinclair wrote:Do you have a point to make or do you just like the photos of these two guys?
Stevens as a vicsim may have been designed with some of the features of Jim Carrey.
Even if so, what does it really matter? I'm sorry but it seems like conjecture that leads nowhere except into goldbuggery to use anonjedi2's great expression.
JLapage
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Egypt 'Revolution'- all the way to Libya 'War'

Unread post by JLapage »

MrSinclair wrote:
JLapage wrote:
MrSinclair wrote:Do you have a point to make or do you just like the photos of these two guys?
Stevens as a vicsim may have been designed with some of the features of Jim Carrey.
Even if so, what does it really matter? I'm sorry but it seems like conjecture that leads nowhere except into goldbuggery to use anonjedi2's great expression.
Absolutely MrSinclair, even though I have no idea what goldbuggery is I opted to simply delete the post.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Egypt 'Revolution'- all the way to Libya 'War'

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

Okay, I am going to go slightly against the crowd but I will try my best to explain my reasoning, and I will also try to justify it by explaining exactly why I think goldbuggery is not so simple. Please feel free to disagree and tell me why. I greatly respect the resistance people are expressing to would-be celebrity conspiracy theorists, but I think going so far as deleting the Jim Carrey post was not entirely necessary.

Goldbuggery refers to the character or characters behind the username Dallas Goldbug, and is not some kind of Biblical, homosexual or James Bondian message, although all of those may have subtly informed the name on purpose by those who created it.

This "Dallas Goldbug" user posted video claims saying "he" found and exposed the collaborating actors behind many of the sims in recent PsyOps (Psychological Operations) such as Sandy Hook, 9/11 and so on.

While it is perhaps amusing to speculate about, it is certainly misleading to ever claim "this actor is 100% certainly such-and-such sim's simulacrum source" and particularly with today's technology. It is pretty clear in legal terms whether it's okay for someone to, for example, steal a popular celebrity's face and put it on a puppet and make it hit itself while saying, "stop hittin' yourself, stop hittin' yourself" as a kind of act. So when a photorealistic simulation of a celebrity is modified to no longer appear to be that celebrity, it is also probably permissible from a legal standpoint. So his claim that an actor is specifically involved because of the simulacrum is the main issue, I think, not to mention many of the people he claimed were "obvious" matches were in fact anything but.

So whether anything he peddles is true, the fact is that he deliberately mixes the important groundbreaking research into sims with blatantly wrong information. He does this for only one obvious reason I can gather and that is to specifically confuse us about something that we are just getting aware of as a world populace: the deep collaboration between the murderous military propaganda and sell-out Hollywood whoring.

When I first crafted the Vicsim Report, I included some speculation about this sort of thing, as an explanation for how something automated, cheap and recognizable could be used to lend subliminal realism to a simulated entity. I went on to write a brief sequel about sim face parts that I never published about this matter. The reason I didn't publish it was because, at the time, Simon wisely cautioned me and said, "No, people are not ready for this ..." and it's true I was rushing headlong into speculation about the sims' construction methods that I was only guessing about.

Dallas Goldbug's purpose, as far as I can gather, is to do just what we didn't do on this site, which is make wild accusatory claims just for the sake of wanting a villain in the whole simulation debacle. Wanting information we could never have because of its scrambled and cryptological nature. Yes, we've speculated about actors' roles when we are perfectly aware of some level of guilt already. For instance, Robert DeNiro clearly making his appearance in the 9|11 Naudet movie. Or the obvious roles of Jews, Jesuits, Masons, Scientologists and other mind-control groups. But to pull in every actor willy nilly is perhaps premature and can lead to missteps and over-confidence in this very tricky identification of just what the powers of this incredible new fakery technology are.

Hence, I think of the name "Goldbug" as an associative psychological slight of hand. Lead the revolution down la-la land and give yourself a villainous name (under the guise of "irony"), so your followers and fans can be later swept away by an Alex Jones or Julian Assmaster or G.I. Joe Snowjob or some neocon "hero" also guided by the same puppeteers.

I plead guilty to being the first to go down this route, even if I never published my original most extreme speculations about all the Seinfeld and Star Trek actors, because I should be intellectually honest about what my feeling was (and still is) on it. I still feel the celebrity angle is an important wake up call for most people to recognize their heroes may actually be the bad guys by their own true value system. I also feel as though goldbuggery can be used deliberately to make a correctly identified agent-actor seem innocent by association with the idiotic Dallas Goldbug, but that doesn't mean we should readily endorse its methods and dig into that level of muck and mire.

I apologize for starting any newfound interests in this line of reasoning because of my Paul Giamatti speculation, but I tried to make it clear in that post that there were a number of fishy things about NASA's "chief" freelance photographer, and "chief" among them was not necessarily any deliberate connection or implied consent by Giamatti.

To be clear, my stance on it is that I think it's better not to accuse actors of willfully throwing in their appearance if it's not clearly them, but it is safe to assume the sim creators use famous faces and remix them to craft their sims. And we don't have to post celebrity speculation about every single little small-time background character sim.

In this case, though, I don't think deleting the post was warranted since JLapage was not spamming multiple topics with it, and he made it clear that he wasn't saying Jim Carrey deliberately lent his face, only that it might have been used to make the sim. And demonstrating to the average person that this borrowing/stealing faces is possible (and it's even possible to map a different face to video of a given actor) may still be an important point to helping the average person understand sims.

Just as long as we don't get too carried away with it. Nyuck nyuck.

Sorry this post went off topic but it seems relevant in the here and now, so I won't move this discussion to the derailing room if people want to make counter points. Maybe it can be moved to a different topic.
JLapage
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Egypt 'Revolution'- all the way to Libya 'War'

Unread post by JLapage »

Very well put Hoi. It's quite a complex issue indeed.

[ADMIN: long quote removed -hp]
fbenario
Member
Posts: 2256
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: Egypt 'Revolution'- all the way to Libya 'War'

Unread post by fbenario »

JLapage wrote:Very well put Hoi. It's quite a complex issue indeed.
Why did you quote Hoi's entire post, when you weren't responding to any part of it? It's lazy and wastes space.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Simulated Faces (Which actors/parts/techniques involved?

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

Okay, I've moved this side discussion into a forum where anything on the edge of 'goldbuggery' might be moved before it is deleted.

This is a sensitive complex topic, but I thought I would leave room for it. If anyone doesn't understand my above post and what will be allowed or not allowed, let me know and I can try to clarify what we'd try to do here.
JLapage
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Simulated Faces (Which actors/parts/techniques involved?

Unread post by JLapage »

When I first crafted the Vicsim Report, I included some speculation about this sort of thing, as an explanation for how something automated, cheap and recognizable could be used to lend subliminal realism to a simulated entity. I went on to write a brief sequel about sim face parts that I never published about this matter. The reason I didn't publish it was because, at the time, Simon wisely cautioned me and said, "No, people are not ready for this ..." and it's true I was rushing headlong into speculation about the sims' construction methods that I was only guessing about.
Hoi, I would suggest that now would be an appropriate time to publish your sequel for sim face parts. This might lead to new grounds with the possible valuable (as always) inputs from other cluesforum members.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Simulated Faces (Which actors/parts/techniques involved?

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

It is in an almost inaccessible format now - some office document that, transfered between computers, now resembles a mishmash. I had naively used the built-in line drawing tools to point to face parts and opening the file now with whatever program I have now has caused all the lines to shift nonsensically.

But instead of publishing the bad doc as a PDF, I can try to reconstruct it on the forum one day and hand-style the graphics. I will probably change a lot, though, given all the advances in the technology. Though, I would probably try to stick to the 9/11 sims since they seemed to be some of the worst lot. And the first major clue in recorded history that this many sims of this level of detail have been attempted to "successfully" fool so many people (who honestly for the most part haven't actually taken a good look at most of the sims, which is why I say "successfully" in quotes; people aren't so dumb as they are lazy). I guess because they didn't have this computer tech during the time of the Titanic or World War II. Although fake people have been going on probably since time immemorial.

Not much needs to change about the 'Mr. Potato Head' technique of artificial face construction. Still works on a lot of folks.
Post Reply