All right, people. We know what we have to do!
National Naked Bike Ride!
Someone should sit Mike down with his eyes held open and review all the security tapes from the 6th of January attempted overthrow of the United States.
But wait, maybe Mikey wasn’t threatened by the 'tourists ’ actions? Perhaps Mike was one of the congresscritters who was in on the plan to delay the elector count??
And about those Epstein files? I doubt you’re in them Mike so no skin off your back to release them. Right? Right?
Something like this?
Mike “Where’s my” Johnson was threatened by nudity? Guy’s so weird he’s probably never seen himself nude.
The Naked Bike Ride is an annual Portland event. It’s been going on for years without the city being pulverized by an angry deity. Johnson is either ignorant, disingenous or upset that he wasn’t invited.
The Fremont Troll is a lot more threatening, although it’s in Seattle.
Every year? There’s one every month.
That’s not what I’m worried about being pulverized by…
I’ve seen one that takes place in San Francisco. It wasn’t a very warm day and I admired the fortitude of the ~50 cyclists I saw.
Seemed about the most harmless crowd of people I’d ever seen. They certainly weren’t carrying concealed weapons; unlike the crowd at any RW rally.
There’s one in London every year too. I tend to give it a wide berth because just the idea of naked bike riding gives rise to thoughts of all the places one could end up chafed.
Theres also one in my part of the world. Dun see how it could be threatening
It threatens the delicate comfort of the narrow minded prudish Xian fundamentalist morons who voted the current criminal regime into power.
No deeper than that.
Here’s another link. I hope his (ex?) wife and their child are safe.
I want someone to use AI to make all those J6 criminals naked.Maybe that will scare Johnson into realizing it wasn’t peaceful.
Of course his name is Johnson. It should be dick or scrotum even.
I think I’m in a mood.
If anyone is a never-nude, it’s that weirdo.
So apparently that swastika flag seen in the Congressman’s office on video was a maaagic flag that can only be seen on camera? The stupid here is coming up with that explanation. Or evil. I couldn’t decide. I like their use of “sources.” Also all of the ads-you’d think Fox would be rolling in the money.
I’m no student of optical engineering, but if (and I use that word in the broadest possible sense) an image can be manipulated to show one thing to the naked eye and another to a camera… why have we not seen more of this magic? I can see a great possible use of this technique in the No Kings protests.
And if you google it, you can’t seem to find any examples of such flags.
As has been remarked in another thread, use of Moire patterns allows hiding of images until viewed by a system that has the right sampling frequency makes the image obvious. One place this is used is in protecting documents and currency from being copied on a copier.
The thing is, it won’t always work with, say a camera. The TV camera has to image the bject at just the right magnification for the effect to manifast
There’s the fundamental question: Physically, how are cameras different from eyes? If you’re planning such a prank, you need to consider the ways in which it’s possible to do this.
Well, the easiest way to make something look different to a camera is probably a filter of some kind on the camera. If light from one portion of the flag was polarized in one direction, your eyes could see it, but a camera that incorporates a polarization filter would not see it. You could do something similar with wavelengths of light. I’ve seen 3D systems that use just slightly different wavelengths of light to produce the two stereo images - filter one wavelength for each eye. But would this work for such different colors? Swapping one red for a slightly different red would be easy, but completely swapping red and white? A bigger challenge.
You could also use a wavelength that is invisible to an eye, but shows up on camera, like just barely into the IR or UV range. But will the camera display that as a red color, or something else? And again, can you use that to perfectly swap the colors?
Another way would be relative intensities. Cameras can be much more sensitive to low light than our eyes, so they might pick up a weak red that we just don’t see, and amplify it in the image. But again, could you completely invert the colors that way? You could impose a color on the white background, maybe, but imposing white on a brighter color background? No so much.
Color, polarization, intensity. Probably the three easiest ways to make a camera picture look different from a naked eye view. But any of them would be dependent upon the particular camera involved. Does it use an internal polarization filter, what color filters does it use, how sensitive is it to low-light or non-visible light? The trick, even if it were possible, would only work for the exact tech configuration of one specific type of camera.