Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

The obvious has been officially confirmed ...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Roy
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Actually it goes to intent. Videos are altered all the time. When somebody does a lengthy interview, there are often excerpts that are used to represent the entire interview due to time limits on broadcasting.

    If the video is edited purposefully to distort the message, it's faked.
    If the video is edited for time, but the message remains true, it's "edited".
    So if a video is edited to never show the crowd at its peak, is that sufficient distortion to qualify as being faked?
    I don't have a dog in this fight - I was simply commenting on the fact that the difference between "editing" and "faking" comes down to intent.
    Exactly. The intent was given.
    Last edited by Roy; 10-30-2019, 11:07 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    The issue here is was...
    I'm aware of the issue, Jim, and the fact that this has been rehashed over and over and over and over....

    I don't have a dog in this fight - I was simply commenting on the fact that the difference between "editing" and "faking" comes down to intent.

    I also do not wish to discuss this with you.

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Actually it goes to intent. Videos are altered all the time. When somebody does a lengthy interview, there are often excerpts that are used to represent the entire interview due to time limits on broadcasting.

    If the video is edited purposefully to distort the message, it's faked.
    If the video is edited for time, but the message remains true, it's "edited".

    It then can become a source of contention whether the video (edited for time) was done so in such a manner as to misrepresent the person being interviewed, or topic being covered.
    The issue here is was any potential inaccuracy in the time lapse purposeful. Could 'editing for time' explain the large open areas towards the monument seen across the entire day.

    1) What was the potential inaccuracy of a timelapse:

    In a 'non-fake' timelapse, the stills used in the timelapse will be selected at a certain interval. Say one still every 30 seconds or every minute. Played back at 30fps it speeds up the changes in the crowd size of the mall significantly. Nevertheless, even if only 1 frame is taken every 5 minutes, that still only allows a 5 minute window for the mall to fill up beyond what was posted and then driain enough not to notice a change. If the selection interval was 5 minutes and covered a 12 hour period, that would produce a video that was 60/5*12 = 144/30 = 4.8 seconds long. Given that time lapse is longer than 5 seconds, the selection interval is < 5 minutes.

    2) Is it therefore possible to 'accidentally' create an inaccurate timelapse that significantly altered the apparent size of the crowd.

    No, the crowd size could not grow and drain fast enough in the selection interval time-frame to make any significant difference.

    Conclusion 1: If the time lapse was 'edited' as MM claims and it does not show the true full extent of the crowed, at least as to the possible variation in size over the selection interval, then someone with malicious intent removed ALL* those frames that would show that additional extent (which would require thousands of people to fill the open areas).

    Conclusion 2: since there is no accidental means of producing a time lapse that shows any significant reduction in actual crowd size, the accusation of 'editing' as an explanation for the large gaps near the washington monument never being filled is in fact an accusation that the time lapse video was 'faked' (purposefully altered) in order to show a smaller maximum crowd size.


    Jim

    *one could maintain no stills were ever taken during the largest portions of the crowd (i.e. a 'gap' in the sampling of the camera) - but this can be shown to be false per my previous analysis where the hi res picture from the capitol used by MM and others to claim the back towards the mall was full was shown to match - taking into account perspective - the picture taken at the same time from the Washington Monument which shows large open gaps - which means there were in fact stills taken during the largest extent of the crowd and given Trumps speech was also much longer than the selection interval, that extent would have existed much longer than the selection interval.
    Last edited by oxmixmudd; 10-30-2019, 10:59 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    Well here we have one clue as to why there is such a great divide here. If you change the truthful character of the video so that it not longer reflects what actually happened, it become 'fake' - as in no longer real, no longer accurate. Now that can be a mistake, a result of the selection algorithm for the time lapse (though that would imply the 'peak' was very short-lived and unlikely to make much difference) or it was done purposefully to mislead. If the person doing the editing purposefully removed the maximum extent of the crowd so as to create the impression the mall was never actually full, then 'the video was faked' as an absolutely correct assessment.

    IT IS THE LATTER THAT IS THE ACCUSATION FROM MM ABOUT THE VIDEO. And that accusation exists to explain why the time lapse video NEVER shows the Mall any fuller than the pictures marked as taken at the time of the inauguration from the Washington Monument. It's all about Truth vs Fiction. And MM, and apparently you as well, would prefer the fiction that says somehow something was wrong with the raw data that shows large areas of the mall EMPTY at all times of the day near the Washington Monument.

    It is this very issue MM and so many of you have with simple, objective truth that is causing the great divide we see here.

    This is simple, objective stuff, and yet those of you on the Trump side of the fence will not and can not accept these simple, objective facts and truths. And it permeates EVERY discussion we have.


    Jim
    I'm not interested in discussing this with you, Jim. Thanks.

    Leave a comment:


  • Zymologist
    replied
    My two cents on "faked" vs "edited:" when I think about a video being faked, I think of images being altered or staged, or in the case of the crowd size thing maybe photos from another event used deceptively, or something along those lines. So just in a general sense I would regard referring to MM's comments as calling the video "fake" to be an unfair characterization.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    Well here we have one clue as to why there is such a great divide here. If you change the truthful character of the video so that it not longer reflects what actually happened, it because 'fake' - as in no longer real. If the person doing the editing purposefully removed the maximum extent of the crowd so as to create the impression the mall was never actually full, then 'the video was faked' as an absolutely correct assessment.

    IT IS THE LATTER THAT IS THE ACCUSATION FROM MM ABOUT THE VIDEO. And that accusation exists to explain why the time lapse video NEVER shows the Mall any fuller than the pictures marked as taken at the time of the inauguration from the Washington Monument. It's all about Truth vs Fiction. And MM, and apparently you as well, would prefer the fiction that says somehow something was wrong with the raw data that shows large areas of the mall EMPTY at all times of the day near the Washington Monument.

    It is this very issue MM and so many of you have with simple, objective truth that is causing the great divide we see here.

    This is simple, objective stuff, and yet those of you on the Trump side of the fence will not and can not accept these simple, objective facts and truths. And it permeates EVERY discussion we have.


    Jim
    Nah, you’re wrong. The issue of why you’re incapable of having an honest discussion about Trump is you view Trump as the Antichrist and everything he says and does, is viewed through that same panic mode lens.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    If a video is edited in order to alter it's understanding, then how is that different than being faked. It's just semantics!
    Actually it goes to intent. Videos are altered all the time. When somebody does a lengthy interview, there are often excerpts that are used to represent the entire interview due to time limits on broadcasting.

    If the video is edited purposefully to distort the message, it's faked.
    If the video is edited for time, but the message remains true, it's "edited".

    It then can become a source of contention whether the video (edited for time) was done so in such a manner as to misrepresent the person being interviewed, or topic being covered.

    Leave a comment:


  • Roy
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Claiming that someone said "faked" when they said "edited" is indeed a falsehood, Mr. Nitpick.
    But I didn't claim that he actually used the word "faked", only that that was the gist of his comment.

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Claiming that someone said "faked" when they said "edited" is indeed a falsehood, Mr. Nitpick. Funny how you allow for imprecision if you can use it to bludgeon one of your favourite targets.
    Well here we have one clue as to why there is such a great divide here. If you change the truthful character of the video so that it not longer reflects what actually happened, it become 'fake' - as in no longer real, no longer accurate. Now that can be a mistake, a result of the selection algorithm for the time lapse (though that would imply the 'peak' was very short-lived and unlikely to make much difference) or it was done purposefully to mislead. If the person doing the editing purposefully removed the maximum extent of the crowd so as to create the impression the mall was never actually full, then 'the video was faked' as an absolutely correct assessment.

    IT IS THE LATTER THAT IS THE ACCUSATION FROM MM ABOUT THE VIDEO. And that accusation exists to explain why the time lapse video NEVER shows the Mall any fuller than the pictures marked as taken at the time of the inauguration from the Washington Monument. It's all about Truth vs Fiction. And MM, and apparently you as well, would prefer the fiction that says somehow something was wrong with the raw data that shows large areas of the mall EMPTY at all times of the day near the Washington Monument.

    It is this very issue MM and so many of you have with simple, objective truth that is causing the great divide we see here.

    This is simple, objective stuff, and yet those of you on the Trump side of the fence will not and can not accept these simple, objective facts and truths. And it permeates EVERY discussion we have.


    Jim
    Last edited by oxmixmudd; 10-30-2019, 10:32 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Claiming that someone said "faked" when they said "edited" is indeed a falsehood, Mr. Nitpick. Funny how you allow for imprecision if you can use it to bludgeon one of your favourite targets.
    If a video is edited in order to alter it's understanding, then how is that different than being faked. It's just semantics!

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by Roy View Post
    Editing video so that it shows something different from reality is a form of faking.

    Even if you disagree, that is a difference of opinion, not a lie.

    So please retract your accusation.
    Claiming that someone said "faked" when they said "edited" is indeed a falsehood, Mr. Nitpick. Funny how you allow for imprecision if you can use it to bludgeon one of your favourite targets.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    I have no reason to trust you.
    You have every reason to trust me, but you just trust your sources of fake news more, and you will continue to discuss these matters as someone who is almost wholly ignorant of the facts.

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Like I said, if you have anything new to add that I haven't already refuted, then take it to the appropriate thread. I will not entertain that dead in this thread any longer.
    You were unable to refute anything that I brought forth in that thread. It's just entertaining to see you are still clueless as regards what happened there. But hey, anyone incapable of understanding such basic principles of optics and perspective and willing to believe the insane rantings of pro-trump conspiracy theorist like those making the brain dead claims about the crowd size can not be expected to be able to evaluate what is happening today wrt ukraine etc. Which was my original point.

    So trust you? No Mm, I have no reason to trust you.

    Jim

    Leave a comment:


  • Roy
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    That's a baldfaced lie, and the quote is right there to prove it. I said the video was edited, not "faked", and I never said the park service did the editing.
    Editing video so that it shows something different from reality is a form of faking.

    Even if you disagree, that is a difference of opinion, not a lie.

    So please retract your accusation.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    Editing the timelapse to remove the peak size == faked
    False.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Gondwanaland, Today, 03:02 PM
1 response
46 views
0 likes
Last Post Mountain Man  
Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 01:58 PM
0 responses
50 views
1 like
Last Post tabibito  
Started by Cow Poke, 10-15-2021, 11:30 AM
15 responses
125 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Cow Poke, 10-15-2021, 10:20 AM
8 responses
65 views
0 likes
Last Post Cow Poke  
Started by CivilDiscourse, 10-15-2021, 09:43 AM
14 responses
160 views
0 likes
Last Post CivilDiscourse  
Working...
X