Must See TV: Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Obama Investigation; New Criminal Evidence Coming

And it is messages such as that one which convince me that you oughten be taken seriously. From my perspective, you have never won a single point of contention in any exchange I have ever had with you.

My recollection is that i've spanked you so badly and so often that I see no further purpose in making the rubble bounce. Your arguments are just silly, and unworthy of consideration in most cases.

Now you say that I am silent because you have made a strong point and i'm afraid to address it. I say you can live in your weird little world, but I don't have to, and that's why I often don't bother to address your silly points.

Take your explanation for how typewritten characters can get misplaced on a page; It is so nonsensical that i'm not even going to bother. You have to be dumb just to entertain the idea, and i'm not going to do it.

As for correctly predicting when i'm going to ignore you? You are going to be correct about that a lot.

“Actually, I think I can.”

Yeah, I agree with that explanation.

Like the pixel-for-pixel identical elements in Obama’s LFBC PDF.

And it’s why the “R” in “BARACK” and the second “1” in “10641” got put on the image layer in the PDF.

“In this image scan/compression/reproduction scheme, variations too small to be noticeable by humans are distinctly different from the perspective of a machine. “

So you would agree that the scan/compression/reproduction scheme might look at the preprinted BC form text as being different from typewritten text?

“Whatever it would do to the typed “X”, it would do to the box as well, yet the box is exactly where it should be, while the “X” is misaligned both vertically and horizontally.”

When I typed forms I always tried to get the “x” right in the middle of the check box. Push the carriage release and push the variable line spacer knob allowed you to put an “x” anywhere on the paper without physically moving the paper in the typewriter.

BTW, Obama’s LFBC was typed on an Underwood Standard typewriter. If you look at the two examples of the number “8” there is a sherif on the right side of the top loop. Almost like a cocked hat. That was typical of Underwood typewriters in the fifties.

“There is at least seven pieces of evidence to indicate that Lolo Soetoro adopted Barack Obama when he Married Stanly Ann.”

When did this adoption take place? In LoloSoetoro’s immigration file there are several interesting memos. There was one memo from one immigration official to another asking about the status of the son. The second immigration agent looked into it and September of 1967 reported that Barack Obama met the 1952 Immigration Act definition of a step-child. Would he be still legally be referred to as step-child if an adoption had taken place?

Other memos in the file from the same 1967 time period always refer to Barack Obama as the child “from a previous marriage.” He is never referred to as the adopted child of Lolo Soetoro. This is true even as the Soetoro’s claimed emotional and financial hardship if Lolo was sent back to Indonesia or later if Lolo was not allowed to return before the two year wait period ended.

You are seriously going to argue that it will move the supposedly typed text around, but leave all the printed text in the exact correct position?

Yes, it does, See here. It was also confirmed by engineers at Xerox. And it was confirmed by my employer, by Canon, by Toshiba, and by HP.

By what process can the algorithm distinguish between typewritten text and printed text so that it can tell which one it needs to screw up?

When the text is being scanned, it's not paying any attention to the actual text at all. It's paying attention to the shape of text being scanned. So it parses the shape of a letter, determines what it is, and assigns it to a position on the table. This way, the algorithm creates a dictionary/glossary of what each shape is. So if the string AABBCC occurs once and is given a label xyx, the next time that AABBCC occurs it is just replaced in the compressed string by xyx. So what is transmitted is the compressed string xyx; this is supposed to be re-mapped back to AABBCC at the received end.

The problem with JBIG2 is that it is a lossy compression and decompression protocol. It's not a true copy; it's an approximation thereof. An error in the compression and addition to the table will result in incorrect patch substitution. The algorithm doesn't know about words, only 'patches', so it often breaks words into different looking style chunks. Like this:

Another example:

And this is why JBIG2 compression schemes are being tossed out by the copier industry. Lossy compression was a godsend in the days of low bandwidth and limited HDD space, but it was never supervised properly and that means MASS amounts of documents scanned are highly incorrect - especially if they involve numbers or typed text.

In Science and Engineering, we refer to this sort of statement as "Hand Waving." You haven't really explained anything, you've just made some vague reference to an algorithm that does "Weird" things. It is not an answer to how typewritten text can be "weirded" while leaving the printed text in a completely normal condition.

If you need it spelled out for you then, instead of verifying yourself:
* JBIG2 is a lossy compression format
* Lossy compression can introduce errors since it will misread numbers and typewritten
* It's an industry problem that was only discovered last year.
* All copiers made currently use JBIG2.
* It's being gotten rid of because of these problems.
* Links explain it fine, so long as you know the tech.

I cannot comprehend the idea of an algorithm that will screw up only the typewritten text, but will leave the printed text completely normal.

Typewritten text is compressed and added to the dictionary by shape. Printed text is compressed and added to the dictionary by individual pixel, due to irregularity. The reason it was done that way was to increase scanning efficiency. See this paper from 2001. Unfortunately, like the difference between MP3s and FLACs, lossy versus non-lossy compression has its flaws.

I owe you a response, but I am currently mulling over your argument.

Perhaps a more salient question would be why on Earth would copying machine engineers have ever put up with a compression algorithm which doesn't yield accurate copies?

At this point, i'm still highly dubious of your explanation, but the evidence and explanations which you offer are buried in this long winded article, and do not easily present themselves for comprehension.

I'm just going to have to pry loose some spare time to analyze the points mentioned in the article(s) you linked. Till then i'll take a raincheck on this discussion.

Perhaps a more salient question would be why on Earth would copying machine engineers have ever put up with a compression algorithm which doesn't yield accurate copies?

For the same reason as to why the Y2K bug existed. And the same reason the Year 2038 problem exists. JBIG2 was developed in 2000. Think about the hardware available at the time - processing power, memory, and HDD space. It was practically Stone Age compared to what we have now, the development has been that quick. Under those hardware conditions, a lossy compression was the best we could get that could do the job well enough.

No one anticipated the hardware changes - the switch from analog to digital copier systems was bad enough - and no one has yet wanted to invest the time and money in creating a brand new algorithm that isn't lossy. Or that is at least improved.

Now, because of what Kriesel discovered, the industry is going to have to come up with a new one. We can't fix JBIG2. It's not a fixable problem. And creating one and putting it out is going to be a pain.

But that's legacy hardware and software for you. You use it until it doesn't work.

I'm just going to have to pry loose some spare time to analyze the points mentioned in the article(s) you linked. Till then i'll take a raincheck on this discussion.

Doing your own research is a good thing. Go right ahead! Start with the Wikipedia article on JBIG2 for a summary on how it works and then go back to Kriesel, et al. Follow the references too. You'll probably learn more than you ever wanted to know, but you'll be cussing at it in the end.

“the “X” is misaligned both vertically and horizontally.”

Look at Nixon’s 1937 FBI application:

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1093576-nixons-fbi-application.html#document/p1

The first four lines of typed entries are slightly above the dashed lines. But then in line five the first word “Yorba” is slightly above the line and the rest of the entry “Linda, Calif.” are sitting on the line. And from that point on all the typed entries are sitting on the line. That kind of line adjustments can be done with the “variable line spacer” on manual typewriters.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.