Comedy timing > Arbitrary contemporisation


The moment of static (esp the hiss sound) creates a naturalistic feeling pause/reset between each unrelated snippet of humour. A "comedy beat" if you will.

If this video was edited with the smooth silent transition one gets with modern digital broadcast it would detract significantly from the overall effect i.e. beat, reset, beat, reset, beat etc.....

Analogue static does this job beautifully and despite being dated is still almost universally understood/recognised by viewers. Perhaps another less anachronistic technique might have worked (with "boop" noises or something) but the fact remains that this whole static thing does the job wonderfully (for most of us anyway).

It's not "dumbass" when it works this well and the last 70-80 years of visual media didn't just disappear from the cultural memory when digital came along.

If you think you can do better then be my guest, maybe you might find a way that's even funnier and changes peoples attitude. Until then the artistic choices of others stand on their own merits and personally I can't think of an editing technique that would fit this style of vid better.


In summary, it's comedy not a documentary and out of place anachronism is a well practised and successful comedy technique (i.e. the very fact its so out of place is part of the reason its so funny). Why does that bother you so much???

so why the score from 2001: A Space Odyssey for this trailer? and where's the monster Godzilla fights? if it's just another, giant monster who you only catch snippets of while people run around an interact with the by-product damage of a giant creature walking around a city.... until the end of the movie.... why not just watch the other American Godzilla, or Cloverfield...

this seems to me like just a rehash of the American Godzilla from 10yrs back, with updated graphics..."that fog hiding Godzilla is SO realistic!"... but this time, lets make Godzilla look more like the rubber suit Godzilla...

two monsters or more fighting? naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah... why'd they ever actually pay homage to the series like that?

Early on here on the VS I was posting many offerings from an artist on YT who calls himself/herself readymade777-This user's handle comes from Duchamp's concept of 'life as art' , using video snippets from Prelinger, other YT videos, all moving media. Incidentally, the monkey-robot majority ignored most of these offerings...(choggie=submitter=no votes)Passion, conviction, accusatory banter.... the 'troll' label follows.

Too much truth, meaning, seasoned with urgency and a few expletives=trolll on the Internet. Dissenting opinions? Troll.
Overtly nicey-nice, brown-nosing insincerity, and pointing out fallacy or the short-comings of someone who is indefensible???....This shit makes you friends.

The internet is for pussies.

@braschlosan-I had thought that the tubechop.com site would have brought a lot more short snippets of videos here already....

The free-association with 6-second-video comedy segments and the 'vines' buddies is a brilliant side-effect of their popularity-Vines should be frikkin' stoked!

This guys' not lookin' like vines-The vines group core are 20-something roommates and students with recruited extras.

blankfist got no clue and takes that short snippet and makes it into something completely different.

But yeah, you think all the poor children should starve and die in the gutters. Not anyone elses responsibility or moral to help them, teach them, give them any chance in life.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'trampoline, angry wife, kids, crying baby, therapy' to 'trampoline, angry wife, kids, crying baby, therapy, kid snippets' - edited by Fusionaut

I think I can understand it. They're projecting a lot onto that person and need a response that validates the emotional investment.
They need to believe in something and the celebrity is a convenient focus. So an actor can't just be appreciated for their work, they are "nice", "down-to-earth", "appreciative of their fans" etc.

I've never, ever been susceptible to this behaviour (ok when i was about 10 I got the autograph of a magician) and it's something that most people grow out of - the age range of these fans must be around teens to late twenties.

While the scribbles may be just that, having the star pay any kind of attention to them is probably very powerful.

For the star, this kind of adulation might be tiresome, but these people watch your films. If no one showed up that would be a bad sign.

BTW every little snippet I've read up to now suggested that Butler was an insecure dick. But his charm offensive for this Die Hard clone has been well received - see his reddit AMA and the gushing posts.

We have a guy at work who uses Comic Sans in all his emails. Yes, it's pretty legible at 12pt and up, but not so much at 10pt and down.

Plus, we work in software support with a focus on Unix platforms. We're frequently sending snippets of log files or other cryptic, not-natural-language text. Lastly, to top it all off, he can't type. It's a wonder anyone responds to him.

I would also like list of videos... I don't understand why these get taken down for copyright violation... it's only snippets and is more likely to send people to seek out the original material than anything else

Anyway there's a version that's still working here:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xxcqbl_this-is-what-the-internet-was-made-for-2012-edition_news#.UReMcmf4IzQ

Edit: Oh boy, wall of text crits for 10k.

His explanation was rather short and somewhat misleading. Maybe they thought a proper explanation would have been too dry or too lengthy to be of any interest for a sufficient number of their viewers.

tl:dr

If all rotor settings are indicated to be correct, a feedback loop within the circuit indicated a subset of correct connections on the plugboard, even if the initially assumed connection turned out to be wrong. It didn't show all connections, but enough to run it through a modified Enigma to determine if it's a false positive or in fact the correct setting. If it was correct, the rest could be done by hand.

----------------------- Long version -----------------------

Apologies in advance. We had to recreate parts of the Bombe as a simulation, but a) it's been a while and b) it was in German. I'll try to explain the concept behind it, hopefully without screwing it up entirely.

The combination of clear message and code snippet (2:25) is called a crib. This can be used to create a graph, wherein letters are the vertices and connections together with their numerical positions are the edges.

For example, at position 1, "A" corresponds to "W". So you'd create an edge between "A" and "W" and mark that edge as "1". At position 4, "B" corresponds to "T", so there's the edge marked as "4". All edges are bidirectional, the transformation at a specific position can go either way.

Once your graph is finished, you check for loops. These are essential. Without loops, you're boned. In this case, one loop can be found at positions 2,3,5 in form of "T->E->Q->T".

Here the Bombe comes into play. It uses scramblers, each combining all three rotors plus reflector of an enigma into one segment. This way, one Enigma setting is functionally equal to a single scrambler.

Now you can use those scramblers to create an electrical circuit that corresponds to your graph -- scrambler = edge. All scramblers are set to the same initial configuration. The first scramber remains at in the inital configuration, while the second and third get configurations in relation to their edge's numerical value. Configuration in this case means the value of their internal three rotors, so there are 26*26*26 possible settings within each scrambler.

It's basically a sequence of three encryptions.

Example: in our little TEQ triangle, the first scrambler (TE, 2) gets a random starting position. The second scrambler (QE, 5) gets turned three notches, the third scrambler (QT, 3) gets turned one notch. The initial configuration might be wrong, but only the relation between the scramblers matters. A wrong result simply tells you to turn all scramblers another notch, until you get it right.

You have a possibly correct setting when the output matches the input. Specifically, a voltage is applied to the wire of letter "T", leading into the first scrambler. And on a test register attached to the last scrambler, the wire of letter "T" should have a voltage on it as well. If the setting is incorrect, a different letter will light up. Similarly, all incorrect inputs for this particular setup will always light up a different letter at the the end, never the same (thanks to the reflector). If output equals input, you're golden. And if several loops are used, all with the same input/output letter, each of their outputs must equal the input.

To reduce the number of false positives, you need as many connected loops within the crib as possible.

So far, that's an Enigma without a plugboard. To account for that, they introduced feedback loops into the circuit. In our small scale case, the output of the third scrambler would be coupled back into the input of the first scrambler. The number of loops determines the number of possible outcomes with each specific setting. All of these are fed back into the first scrambler of each loop.

The plugboard, however, changed the input into the system of rotors. Instead of a "T" in our example, it might be a "Z", if those two letters were connected on the board.

A random hypothesis is made and fed into the machine. If the scramblers are set incorrectly, a different letter comes out at the end of each loop and is in return fed back into the first scramblers. Result: (almost) everything lights up. If you start with a good graph, everything will light up.

-----
A key element for this was the "diagonal board", which represented a) all possible connections on the plugboard and b) the bidirectional nature of those connections (AB = BA). Maybe it can be explained without pictures, but I sure as hell can't, so "a grid of all possible connections between scramblers and letters + forced reciprocity" will have to suffice.
-----

If, however, the setting was correct, a wrong hypothesis for the input connection merely meant that everything except the right connections was lit up.

Let's say the fix point of the loops in our graph is the letter "T". We assume that it's connected to the letter "Z" on the plugboard. A voltage is applied to "Z" on the test register, and thereby inserted into the circuit at the first scrambler. Loop #1 applies voltage to the letter "A" on the test register, #2 lights up "B", #3 lights up "F". These three outputs are now fed back into the first scrambler, so now the scrambler has voltage on ZABF, which in return lights up ZABF+GEK on the test register.
This goes on until everything except "U" is lit up on the test register. That means three things: a) the settings are correct, b) the hypothesis is wrong, c) "T" is connected to "U".

Reasons:
a) if the settings were incorrect, the entire register would be alive
b) if the hypothesis was correct, only the letter "Z" would be alive on the register
c) due to the feedback loop, the only way for the output to be "U" is if the input was also "U", and the reciprocity within the system makes it impossible for any other input to generate the output "U". Since "T" was the fix point for our loops, "T" is connected to "U".

Similarly, if the initial hypothesis is correct, everything on the test register except "U" stays dead.

The diagonal board provides registers for every single letter and allows the user to pick one as a test register. During operation, all the other registers serve as visual representations of the deductions based on the initial hypothesis. So you actually get to see more than just the initial connection, all based on the same concept.

@jimnms

(1)

I don't accept that the US is a more violent country by nature, therefore to me approaching it by cutting down all violence as you say is not plausible.

People can wax lyrically about a gun and violence obsessed culture but as far as I'm concerned the pervasiveness of Western society means you can say that about just about any country nowadays.

Socio-economic conditions determine the rate of murder and all indicators show that despite the US having a high per capita income rate, it has a drastically above average murder rate.

The only logical conclusion I see is that the easy availability of guns empowers the ratio of violent people with a tool designed to liquefy people's insides resulting in this.

(2)

I agree that the media focus on mass shootings ignores the wider issue. It is true however that mass shootings are certainly more common in the US that in equally highly developed countries so that mere fact is still newsworthy. The significantly higher murder rate of the US to any other developed country should be the issue but nobody seems to ever talk about it from the snippets I see.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

You mention China. Mass murder sprees certainly can happen in any country regardless of gun regulation. Nothing will stop the occasional delusion but resourceful individual from improvising but it stands to reason that looking at the wider trend, despite China being drastically less developed it's murder rate per capita is 20% of the US.

What FUN! Really well edited. I almost did a spit take when the snippet of Hendrix appeared during the ... um ... "guitar solo"

Kid Snippets: Basketball Class has been added as a related post - related requested by Fusionaut.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Kid-Snippets-Basketball-Class

Tags for this video have been changed from 'kids, child, drive, car' to 'kids, child, drive, car, kid snippets' - edited by Fusionaut