My thing is none of these decodes have been confirmed. People “decode” them then believe it applies to current events, even after it falls through. I don’t necessarily doubt the existence of Q, I’m doubting a lot of the decodes. And by doubting the decodes, people think you’re a shill or whatever. To add, people are believing things that we have 100% evidence to the contrary (for example, Biden is in a studio and not the white house-we have so much evidence that this is false).
I like to be realistic in that I don’t want to believe something just because it’s what I want to hear. I want to make sure whatever I’m believing is verified in some manner. A lot of skepticism has been lost on this site.
Agreed. The decodes (esp. the ones I see on Telegram) seem to range from rock solid to iffy to Stretch Armstrong levels. I'm a noob so I'm still trying to navigate the drops and reconcile them with what's happening here and now.
At face value, Q's drops were meant for around the same time as they were posted. Was there anything else that implied they were to be used as reference post-2020 election? The only thing I could think of is "Future proves past", but was that for when Q was establishing credibility among anons? I'm just looking for reference as to how to approach random decodes that people may post. Everyday tweets seem to me easy pickings for confirmation bias if you're not careful. Can anyone weigh in?
Keep in mind that AI algorithms can generate "deep fake text" very easily these days: https://www.gwern.net/GPT-3 also fake images, videos, poetry, art, comic books, etc.
Folkmore: after WWII, Alan Turing, the man who broke the German codebooks came to America and met Claude Shannon, the father of Information/Communication Theory. They had lunch together at Bell Labs.
Claude Shannon asked Turing whether they could create a machine that would play the imitation game better than any human. Turing replied that no, but they would only need to create an AI more clever than the President (of AT&T).
My thing is none of these decodes have been confirmed. People “decode” them then believe it applies to current events, even after it falls through. I don’t necessarily doubt the existence of Q, I’m doubting a lot of the decodes. And by doubting the decodes, people think you’re a shill or whatever. To add, people are believing things that we have 100% evidence to the contrary (for example, Biden is in a studio and not the white house-we have so much evidence that this is false).
I like to be realistic in that I don’t want to believe something just because it’s what I want to hear. I want to make sure whatever I’m believing is verified in some manner. A lot of skepticism has been lost on this site.
Well said!
People ran in different directions with "decoding," and they over-analyzed every letter in every drop. That's a recipe for disappointment.
If you ignore all the datefagging, the drops all basically say one thing: Patriots are in control, even if it starts looking like they have lost.
Agreed. The decodes (esp. the ones I see on Telegram) seem to range from rock solid to iffy to Stretch Armstrong levels. I'm a noob so I'm still trying to navigate the drops and reconcile them with what's happening here and now.
At face value, Q's drops were meant for around the same time as they were posted. Was there anything else that implied they were to be used as reference post-2020 election? The only thing I could think of is "Future proves past", but was that for when Q was establishing credibility among anons? I'm just looking for reference as to how to approach random decodes that people may post. Everyday tweets seem to me easy pickings for confirmation bias if you're not careful. Can anyone weigh in?
it is a rorschach test in some respect.
Keep in mind that AI algorithms can generate "deep fake text" very easily these days: https://www.gwern.net/GPT-3 also fake images, videos, poetry, art, comic books, etc.
Folkmore: after WWII, Alan Turing, the man who broke the German codebooks came to America and met Claude Shannon, the father of Information/Communication Theory. They had lunch together at Bell Labs.
Claude Shannon asked Turing whether they could create a machine that would play the imitation game better than any human. Turing replied that no, but they would only need to create an AI more clever than the President (of AT&T).