Here Thar Be Monsters!

From the other side of the argument to the other side of the planet, read in over 149 countries and 17 languages. We bring you news and opinion with an IndoTex® flavor. Be sure to check out Radio Far Side. Send thoughts and comments to luap.jkt at gmail, and tell all your friends. Sampai jumpa, y'all.

19.8.18

Analyzing Q Analysis

We want to express our sincerest thanks to Jeff Rense and his team for their invaluable support.  If this topic interests you, please keep an eye on the Rense Radio Network for exclusive content and updates as we ferret out the Q.

Previous posts:
Deep Throat v, Q
Q The Conspiracy - A Phenomenon
The Gospel According To Q
A-Marketing We Will Q
The Name Of The Q
Q The LARP Carp
Spe-Q-lating On Q
In The Twilight Of The Q
Jonesing For Q

If the reader is like me, the mere mention of the word "mathematics" puts us in a catatonic state that may lead to an instinctual flight reflex to our safe spaces if the subject continues to force its way onto our consciousness.

In the process of researching the Q Phenomenon, I uncovered the realm of q-analysis, which is an algebraic framework used to analyze (among other things) market research, social networks, decision making, urban structures and planning, game theory, and artificial intelligence.

If the reader has been keeping up with my voyage into the twilight world of Q Anon, then at least two of these uses for q-analysis should make your ears perk up.

In my article, "The Name Of The Q," I dropped the bomb that q-analysis is a branch of set theory that seeks to quantify and qualify interactions between members of single sets, and between sets in complex interactions.  At great personal pain and sacrifice, I have endeavored to research and understand this rather oblique form of math in order to report to the reader what I suspect is at the core of the Q Phenomenon.

Q-analysis was developed in the 1970s, by British mathematician Ronald Atkin to model complex social interactions and how they affected everything from market research and decision-making to urban layouts and playing chess.

The latter forms a major part of game theory and can be seen at work in the occasional chess and Go matches between human masters and machines.  It has also become a major tool in modeling and predicting changes to social networks when new information is injected at some point in the network.

Using q-analysis allows those with the tools to visualize complex interactions within and between large groups of people, but more importantly, it allows them to test the diffusion of and reaction to the introduction of new information - say an ad campaign - at different points in the network.  This is used to predict how fast a certain meme will propagate withing in complex network of individuals and what actions/reactions they will take based on it.

Social Network Map
This tool would allow an organization like Cambridge Analytica, for instance, to build a working model of the links that you and I have to other people, how fast a political ad of a particular type would propagate through our networks, predict whether you or I would moderate our political activities based on that meme, and even how much time would be needed before and after the ad hit to get the desired effect.

This is, as one can clearly see, a very powerful tool when manipulating large groups of people, where their connections and behaviors are known.

We know that our online, and even quite a bit of our off-line behavior is known to the likes of Google and Facebook.  Our political and consumer leanings are well exposed, especially if we are active politically and/or make a lot of online purchases.

Even more worrisome are the data possessed by organizations like the NSA, GCHQ, and all the other high-level intel gatherers.  No need to artificially limit ourselves to Russians here.

Using well-established psychological profiling, anyone is able to gather some basic data on any human being - especially one who uses the internet - plug it into a profile generator (such as those used to model mass murderers), then place that person into a profile category and plug them into a social network model also populated by thousands, even millions of profile models.

Given what I now have on our imaginary subject, I can predict how they will behave given new information, and how that information will radiate out from them into their network.  I can also predict how all the other connections in the network will react based on their models.

I know that our imaginary target does most of their socializing with e-friends between the hours of 18:30 and 20:00.  I pop my ad in front of them near the beginning of their session.  Knowing the target's political affiliations and leanings, I know they are likely to forward it to 385 of their "closest" e-friends with similar sensitivities.

I also know that they are likely to make a quick video on YouTube that night about my ad, and given the information in the ad, it will likely get 20,000 hits within the first hour after posting.  If the ad includes a call to protest, I know if my target is likely to join in and roughly how many friends they will bring.

And that's just the starting point.  We haven't even begun to consider all the e-friends that got the message from our target.

And this is just one function of q-analysis.

As readers here know, I use the third-person neuter singular pronoun when referring to Q.  I do this because no one I have found knows anything about Q.  All they have is what they interpret from Q Drops and listening to other's interpretations.  Furthermore, I suspect at least some part of Q is an artificial intelligence.

I suspect artificial intelligence because the complexity and rapidity with which Q modifies its message and encodes its riddles is beyond most of the people on the planet.  Sure, there may be a few who think like this, and they may be involved with Q at some level, but even so these folks would want to verify their encoding and add additional levels they hadn't thought of by passing it through a sophisticated machine learning algorithm.

Q-analysis provides programmers an algebraic framework that allows the algorithm to analyze decision making by third parties, make decisions itself, and ponder the wider implications of those decisions in the context of large groups of people (sets).

By looking at the points where sets align and overlap, and quantifying all possible choices available, a machine can statistically rank which decisions are most likely in any given context.  This would involve an entire boat-load of conditional statements, but with a large enough and fast enough machine, we could derive "most likely outcomes" for any given set within the model, and thus predict outcomes.

As a function of this analysis, we would also have at least one course of action that achieves the ends the user set up, as well as at least one alternative should the first not work as intended.

Forrester Diagram
The sheer number of variables required in this kind of modeling virtually assures us that some form of machine intelligence is part of Q in order to operate in real time.  It would have been used in the planning stages, as well as monitoring outcomes in real time and adjusting to actual effects.

A recent Q event confirms my suspicion that this is the case, and that the whole thing is precisely planned and timed.

On 16 August 2018, Q "dropped" #1918, then an hour or two later, went back and inserted a drop between 1917 and 1918.  The information included in the insert seems rather innocuous, but if you are using q-analysis to model a network, it may have quite a ripple effect to ensure that certain information is released in a certain order.

The reader may take me to task saying the information is already out of order, affecting the outcome.  This is a fair criticism, though without having access to the model, we can't really say for sure.

It may be that the programming is self-correcting given that the information is now in order for future reference.  It may also be that the very act of inserting is itself part of the mechanism needed to achieve the desired outcome.  We can only speculate at this point.

So, our working thesis is this:

Q-Anon is a sophisticated tool for analyzing and manipulating large-scale opinions and measuring in real time the effect of Q "drops" across social networks.  Q is not only operating on a planned roll-out schedule, but is able to react in real time to slight changes in desired outcomes.  This implies artificial intelligence running weaponized linguistics and social network modeling algorithms able to crunch large numbers of variables and rank decisions based on "most likely" results.

Thus, standing back a minute, we have an entity (unknown) operating on multiple levels - inside tipster, religious authority, marketing plan - using a wide variety of tools - sophisticated encryption and coding, gematria, twilight language, q-analysis - to manipulate a mass audience for some purpose not yet clear to the impartial observer.

Frankly, none of this sounds benign.  Manipulating mass audiences without their express knowledge and approval of the entire process and who is doing it indeed seems rather nefarious.

Using timed pre-planned information drops to encourage people to think and even behave in certain ways, when they are completely unaware that they are being toyed with is immoral, regardless of whether the desired outcomes are altruistic and benevolent.

If, as Q and Trump seem to imply, this is a project of military intelligence sanctioned by Donald Trump, then it is a clear indictment against their means and intents.

This is clearly psychological and emotional abuse on a mass scale, no matter what the justification.

If we condemn this kind of behavior on the parts of the mass media and Big Tech, then we must condemn it on the part of the "White Hats".  We cannot assume that whoeverwhatever is behind Q is acting with good intent.

This is no different than a parent whipping the tar out of a child while saying its for the child's own good.

One of the foundational philosophical premises of being human is that we have free will.  Manipulating our beliefs and actions at a subconscious level to achieve any outcome is morally indefensible.  This is especially true when we condemn this activity by someone else because we disagree with their motives, but support it when 'our" people have control.

Moral ambiguity and flexibility is a feature of Marxist/Socialist theory, and is supposedly what "patriots" are fighting against.

7 comments:

  1. Anonymous20.8.18

    ... or, people are just easy to predict.

    I mean, little ol'me easily predicted the rise of a 'fake populist' candidate for the 2016 'selection', back in 2012. And that this fake would be attacked by the very controlled media that controls the fake el president.

    What I did NOT predict, was that the globalists could pull off such an obvious globalist frontman, 'posing' as a 'populist', in D Trump. I gave Trump a one term and done BEFORE he was actually elected but, because the scam is working so well on so many fronts they most likely will keep him in the WH for a second term as well.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous20.8.18

    Well, similar tools ( although bit simpler ) were available to them 50 Years ago however,modern Super Computer predicted these Game-Plans quite some time ago. All possible scenarios and future constellation have already been explored, not only Elections but any global constellation and so do our Adversaries. Russia and China are just catching up. Bro, wish you had access to one of these smart 'thing'.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A.I. analyze thyself..

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous21.8.18

    Isn't the author trying to manipulate people's minds and interpretation with this article? Pot calling the kettle black. It's called persuasion and that's not a bad thing inherently. It's how it's used. Persuasion and manipulation are different. Persuasion is trying to presents facts and scenarios to convince someone of something=encouraging logic. Manipulation is the strangling of a person's ability to make a choice so they are forced to go your way. Q isn't manipulating. It's presenting facts and encouraging people to think and use logic. That's Persuasion

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous21.8.18

    What about the other Q? (I sent this comment to Rense.)

    In all this talk about Q, I’ve not seen anyone reference Star Trek’s Q, which I find really odd. I’ll just quote from startrek.com regarding the character called Q:

    "Q" is the Federation designation for an impudent, self-superior and sometimes malevolent being from the otherwise mysterious Q Continuum. Beginning in 2364, the alien literally began to pop up in Federation space to tease, torment, and try Starfleet officers — especially Captain Jean-Luc Picard of the U.S.S. Enterprise. From the reports and eyewitness accounts it is not certain that the remainder of his kind share his outlook. It should always be stressed that Q's apparent juvenile humor should never be mistaken for the amoral, unconscionable acts of which he is capable.

    We should pay attention to the fact that Star Trek's "Q" was designed to tease and confuse humans, to run circles around what we consider to be a stable reality - he’s a cosmic psy-op.

    I think we're being snookered.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous21.8.18

    Ridiculous. There is no need to "analyse" Q or the so-called phenomenon. It's blatantly obvious that everything about Q is fake. Only morons fall for this conspiracy bullshit.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Nothing has happened to the Deep State. No one has been arrested. No one has plausibly explained why Hillary attended Trump's wedding. Or why there were no pictures of Bin Ladin's dead body or why they dumped him at sea. No pictures of dead kids at Sandy Hook. what really happened on 911, vaporization of gigantic steel and concrete structures, Vegas, etc. Hillary, Trump, Mueller, Giuliani all from NYC. Brett Kavanaugh covered up Vince Foster murder. missing tens of trillions of dollars
    foreign policy hasn't changed. North Korea was never attacked, now it is an advanced nuclear weapon state on par with US, China, and Russia; have to treat it less belligerently US nuclear ICBM arsenal remains stuck in the 1960's; purposely arming the air force with defective, detectable, F-35's

    ReplyDelete

Feel free to leave your own view of The Far Side.