Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

1.2K

Original SHA-512 encoded message 213E577C7421583B08526870A8E1CF9CEFB679DA6E6EDC6254BD6B5DA0505F7B90631DF4D6579D04AFE392FE96C6DBE08C03F89EB8DC98B930ABA62FD19A52A1

you can confirm the full plaint text, including the date and time here (emn178.github.io)

Plaintext:

I believe antifa or u.s. security elements are planning an attack that may kill 179 or more people. To be blamed on the right, or russia, within 2-4 weeks. Predicted at 7.54am, at 5.08.2022

What I learned: My prediction was off by almost a factor of 20 for causalities. The low-ball time-till event, and the high-ball range, I tend to overestimate by x2. Something to keep in mind for the category of [Domestic, High-risk of backlash, low-intensity, policy-driven] predictions.

This comports with the regime's playbook for domestic events, utilizing low-casualty attacks and then inflating the importance of them as if they were large scale attacks. Had I looked at past indicators, such as what party the sitting president is, domestic agenda, events like paypal banning 'dangerous' alternative news sites, and the push for disinformation governance, I might have drawn the conclusion that the predicted attack would likely be a terrant copy-cat, but regrettably I didn't work the analysis that far.

I also neglected to write down the circumstances and chatter that lead me to this prediction. Thats another area to improve on. It tells us the playbook is the same as 2008-2020, again, low-intensity conflict on domestic issues that the regime considers risky to push too fast on.

Considerations and implications:

This tells me the regime's focus is on the elections for some reason, when they supposedly control them. They need policy wins. The implication is they are appealing to their base on domestic non-economic issues to distract from inflation. We can therefore see this as a reactionary shift for the regime. This likely means that the riots of 2020 were not just party infighting but a mix of both astroturf, and entirely organic elements of the base, rioting. In other words this indicates the regime is in fact afraid of its base.

Which tells me they are not 100% in control of their own base, as indicated by the squad, and inflation is causing serious in-party disagreement or friction and fear. This will likely further drive the regime into a deeper reactionary cycle.

Theres more conclusions and implications to draw here, but at the moment the wells run dry. I'll make some further posts when I have a better grasp of the information.

Edit: Fixed plaintext to correspond to SHA-512. Formatting while typing this initially broke it.

Original SHA-512 encoded message 213E577C7421583B08526870A8E1CF9CEFB679DA6E6EDC6254BD6B5DA0505F7B90631DF4D6579D04AFE392FE96C6DBE08C03F89EB8DC98B930ABA62FD19A52A1 you can confirm the full plaint text, including the date and time [here](https://emn178.github.io/online-tools/sha512.html) Plaintext: `I believe antifa or u.s. security elements are planning an attack that may kill 179 or more people. To be blamed on the right, or russia, within 2-4 weeks. Predicted at 7.54am, at 5.08.2022` What I learned: My prediction was off by almost a factor of 20 for causalities. The low-ball time-till event, and the high-ball range, I tend to overestimate by x2. Something to keep in mind for the category of `[Domestic, High-risk of backlash, low-intensity, policy-driven]` predictions. This comports with the regime's playbook for *domestic* events, utilizing *low-casualty* attacks and then inflating the importance of them as if they were large scale attacks. Had I looked at past indicators, such as what party the sitting president is, domestic agenda, events like paypal banning 'dangerous' alternative news sites, and the push for disinformation governance, I might have drawn the conclusion that the predicted attack would likely be a terrant copy-cat, but regrettably I didn't work the analysis that far. I also neglected to write down the circumstances and chatter that lead me to this prediction. Thats another area to improve on. It tells us the playbook is the same as 2008-2020, again, low-intensity conflict on domestic issues that the regime considers risky to push too fast on. Considerations and implications: This tells me the regime's focus is on the elections for some reason, when they supposedly control them. They need policy wins. The implication is they are appealing to their base on domestic non-economic issues to distract from inflation. We can therefore see this as a reactionary shift for the regime. This likely means that the riots of 2020 were not just *party infighting* but a *mix* of *both* astroturf, and entirely *organic* elements of the base, rioting. In other words this indicates the regime is in fact *afraid* of its base. Which tells me they are not 100% in control of their own base, as indicated by the squad, and inflation is causing serious in-party disagreement or friction and fear. This will likely further drive the regime into a deeper reactionary cycle. Theres more conclusions and implications to draw here, but at the moment the wells run dry. I'll make some further posts when I have a better grasp of the information. Edit: Fixed plaintext to correspond to SHA-512. Formatting while typing this initially broke it.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (8).
[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

My prediction was off by almost a factor of 20 for causalities.

So, not a prediction.

[–] • 3 pts

Guys my PP will be 20 inches long tomorrow.

I'm just off by a factor of 20.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Man come on, you rainin' on this man's parade.

[–] • 1 pt

So, not a prediction.

Everything is a prediction. Magnitudes, motives, the participants, time ranges, severity, pre-planned agendas and reactions that emerge from an event.

It is important to remember, part of the exercise of predicting and analyzing, is to better adjust your own expectations and biases about each of these variables so that each prediction after, externally models the outcomes from an otherwise unknown semi-blackbox of how a system operates.

Future predictions will now likely be more accurate on magnitude, and timeline, because of these details.

I encourage you to try this method.

[–] • 2 pts

If I could read, I'd call you a faggot.

[–] • 3 pts

If I could read, I'd call you a faggot.

Just don't call me a glowfaggot.

[–] • 0 pt

Everything is a prediction.

When everything is a prediction, then nothing is a prediction. Stopped clocks blah, blah, blah.

[–] • 0 pt

When everything is a prediction, then nothing is a prediction.

No, I mean every detail is a variable. Not "everything every written till the end of time, is some prediction."

Binary predictions alone aren't all that useful.

If we assume most significant events, even black swans, have a non-zero probability of happening at any time between now and forever, and we predict then it makes more sense to predict all of the details, the who, the what, the when, the where, and why, because the ranges, the precision, and the accuracy, while different between each of these, will reveal to us a lot more information than a one-off prediction ever could. And even when you're wrong, the difference between the correct answer, and your prediction, on a given variable, will tell you a lot more than it otherwise would.