Skip to content

Darrk Dysmal

Things I wonder ‘Is it just me?’

Hey, now I know for a fact that no one is reading, I can just kind of say any shit I want for my own amusement and gratification, right?

This seems as good a time as any to do some o’ that shit.

So, um, yeah. [/slick segue into post]

I seem to have a special kind of mind, I think. It has a very flexible and comprehensive filing system. Which often seems to be a curse more than a blessing.

Examples:

When I hear literally any music, I’m instantly transported to the first time I heard it, or who I was with, or who introduced me to it etc along with all the emotion of the time (which was often ‘those were the fuckin days, man!’. Although I admit a lot of that could be rose tinted spectacles and all that). Almost inevitably instantly followed by a flash forward to my emotions of today. Which is often regret or remorse for the then/now situation; quite often along the lines of ‘how did someone I spent so much time with and enjoyed being with so much or had so many feelings for end up being a stranger’? [...]  read more

Share this shit:

FML

Oh bollocks. Apparently I just autorenewed this domain. I really didn’t mean to. I was going to let it die.

After all, I died inside years ago. I simply exist now. And really you don’t want to hear about the crushing despair of wasting the rest of your days until you mercifully pop your clogs, do you? Do you? I mean, I’ve got hours – years – of that shit I could blog about. But I gave up on the satirical trolly shit long ago because the world is just so fucked up in so many ways that it’s just not even funny any more. I’d rather not think about any of it, tbh. [...]  read more

Share this shit:

Shooting YouTube Employees Is Not Against Facebook Community Standards

So I was conversing with a delightful chap on a Facebook post about the YouTube incident yesterday who said the blood was on squarely YouTube’s hands and that they deserved what they got, because he had a constitutional right to post his free (hate) speech on their privately owned service; a right which they were denying him.

He said that he was going to round up his buddies in the NRA and go there and show them what’s what. I helpfully pointed out that what he had just posted constituted a terrorist threat and duly reported him, urging anyone else who came across his post and construed it in the same way as I did to also use the report tools.

However,  it turns out that saying you are gonna go shoot up YouTube HQ again doesn’t violate Facebook community standards. Harsh.

Mind you, I dunno what good it will do… even when the authorities have advanced warning, as they did with psycho bitch who did the shooting, they do fuck all about it. Well, not fuck all… they let her go about her daily activities, which in this case was shooting YouTube employees.

So when this happens again and the shooter is a guy called Clint, remember you read it here first…

(I think it was Clint. It might have been Cliff. Despite it not being against their community standards to kill employees of a rival tech firm, they do appear to have conveniently rewritten history – and by history, I mean my FB activity log – so I can’t find and return to the comment thread to quote it verbatim, which frankly was more disturbing than my paraphrasing above. I wish I could remember it more exactly, but I troll a lot of fucking people on social media in any given day.)

Share this shit:

Please Delete Your Facebooks And Go Live Under A Rock

The other night a bunch of completely clueless cunts formed the BBC question time panel and discussed the whole Facebook/Cambridge Analytica debacle. The trouble is, these know nothing fucktards are spreading their disinformation and outright lies under some sort of air of authority on the subject.

Not to mention the clueless media cunts who have been flogging the shit out of this ‘story’ for days. And the clueless Twitter cunts who have been raging about it.

Dozens of these articles and tweets have been along the lines of ‘You Should Delete Your Facebook! Now!’ and vows from tens of thousands of morons to do the same.

Yeah. That boat already sailed, and frankly the whole thing is a complete non-issue if you consider that this happens all the fucking time, with your explicit complicity. Every time you use some ‘app’ on Facebook, or your phone or your tablet or whatever, you grant them all sorts of rights and permissions to do whatever the fuck they like with your information. Because you’re ignorant morons.

Do you reeeeeeally think that a selfie filter app needs permission to access your telephone, your contacts, your calendar, your email, your microphone, your SMS etc etc?

No. In your eagerness to post another fucking photo, you just invited them to butt fuck you.

Of course, you could just learn how to use your hardware and software and the tools provided to safeguard yourself. I mean, I am very confident that Cambridge Analytica have jack shit on me because for one thing, I don’t do fucking online quizzes in the form of Facebook Apps you grant permissions to, and for another, I lock my shit down tight. Hell, my own friends can’t even tag me in a post or comment.

Even Zucks himself is just paying lip service by speaking out on the issue, because you already fucking agreed to that shit. They have a whole app developer centre dedicated to helping you create apps with a few clicks that are DESIGNED to leech Facebook users data.

I’ve personally knocked up apps (one was a ‘Cheat At Words With Friends’ kinda thing) in hours that are just designed to suck every last ounce of data you fuckwits ever fed into Facebook and you are more than happy to agree because you’re desperate to one-up your buddies on a game.

Which is why unless you actually DO look after your data, you have no right whatsoever to rage when someone treats you like the cunt you are…

But by all means, do please delete your Facebooks and go live under a rock.

Share this shit:

We Need To Have A Serious Discussion About The Internet, Porn and You

If you’re a previous visitor, you’ll know I don’t do serious. If you’re here first time because of this clickbait titled article, then you’ll have to take my word for it. And for Gods sake don’t stray off this article elsewhere. You WILL regret it. I promise you.

But I digress. I have serious things to say in a probably not so serious way. You see, there’s some stuff that no one is directly talking about and it literally potentially affects everyone, whether they participate or not.

The implications of which are basically world changing. And it’s coming to an internet and law courts near you, quite soon.

It’s going to be a tsunami. A tsunami of completely faked porn videos. Possibly starring you. Or yer mum.

Err, Wot?

OK. Enough build up. WTF am I talking about?

So this story came up on Facebook last night, about the truth behind a Daisy Ridley ‘Sex Tape’. It’s fake. But the ‘new and noteworthy’ part of it is that it is a ‘real’ fake: somebody went to some trouble to superimpose Daisy’s face onto a porn clip.

Enough that people believed it. Which is basically the opposite reaction to most videos; people are more than willing to cry fake. To all intents and purpose, it’s a porn clip of Daisy Ridley. She’s just not in the clip.

Right now, that was probably a reasonably painstaking task, even for an enthusiastic amateur video editor. Enough of a task that not many people are going to take the time to do it. (Especially for free. If you can do that shit, you better be gettin’ paid.)

However, all of the technologies to pull this off in a mainstream consumer level video editing app already exist. It just hasn’t been done yet. But we’re probably only a generation or two of GPUs and CPUs and a generation or two of software refinement away from it. (Note, ‘a generation’, in computer terms, is like 6 months to 2 years. Same as your phone.)

Some Waffle

Fair warning: I’m gonna do a bit of boring and slightly techie waffle now by way of illustrating my point. Prepare for your eyes to glaze over. Or skip this bit; it’ll literally make no difference.

What you’re really looking at is a fairly innocuous app designed for ‘innocent fun’ along the lines of what Snapchat filters (or those annoying Animoji things) can do for you now – they can track your face and features and even make the superimposed face do expressions etc. FaceRig pulls this off to near perfection under ideal conditions, and you can make your own avatars with your own textures that mimic every move you make. You can even add props and clothes etc. And (at least, on the PC version) you can replace any video feed with your FaceRig feed so you ‘become’ a dapper red fox in a top hat and tails in your video chat or live streaming or podcast or whatever in any app.

The leap is being able to map this to full motion video, taking things like perspective and distance and movement into account. But it’s not that much of a leap. Imagine! You’ll be able to put daddies face on little Freddy toddling down the garden! What a hoot!

There are video apps that can do real time motion tracking in 3d space right now. Even on phones. There are plenty of Makeup apps and touch up apps like Portrait Pro and Portrait Body that can detect people and their features automatically in a picture (and therefore not much of a leap to frames of a video). You can mask off hair with ease to protect bangs – or entirely change the hair and makeup – and blend with the face by just painting roughly over the areas.

There are dedicated video apps such as HitFilm that allow you extremely sophisticated and fine grained abilities to add objects and particle effects to video footage in post production and yet can automatically track the objects movements in 3d space. Change the colour of a car. Add a lightsabre to a persons hand. Just a few clicks if you know what you’re doing and maybe some corrective key frame adjustments to the accuracy of the automatic tweening.

There are apps that can place modelled 3d objects in a scene and match focal distance and camera lens settings. Portrait Pro and Landscape Pro can even move the lighting position and colours in a photo with surprising effectiveness, even readjusting shadows and reflections. So again, rendering frames of a video, not such a big deal.

Video game cutscenes are getting so realistic these days, you can be forgiven for thinking it’s live action. (It’s always the lipsync that lets them down in my opinion). Lots of the animation looks so good because it’s motion captured from live actors. Note how they’re getting way more arty in their ‘camera work’ now they can easily apply after effects such as camera shake – or indeed stabilisation – and change focus and apply lens effects on the fly.

Back In The Room?

So. The point, then. Putting all that existing software tech together, you can track and recognise people and facial features, per frame of video, and rerender and tweak any elements of the scene, superimpose a new face over the original pretty much with the ease you can faceswap in snapchat today; ‘put that face there’. Done. Then wait a few hours for it to render, automatically matching facial movements frame for frame, mimicking the focus, lighting, colours etc from the scene. Then share! Share everywhere!

Except it’s not going to be about putting daddies face on little Freddy toddling down the garden, is it?

What’s the first thing anyone is gonna do with it?

 

Porn.

 

Yes, I Said Porn.

But this is not just regular Porn. This is Celebrity Porn! You Fucking Your Favourite Celebrity Porn! Your Teacher Fucking Some Contraption In A Dungeon. You Fucking That Girl That Said No! Revenge Porn That Never Happened! Screeeeeeeech. Wait, what?

It’s going to be a tsunami. A tsunami of completely faked porn videos. Possibly starring you. Or yer mum.

Sooooo, how does the law stand on that? You publish a porn video to every free porn site on the planet of the ex girlfriend… only thing is… it’s entirely faked. I mean, it IS a porn clip. It’s just that it didn’t actually star who is, um, starring in the video. Is it still revenge porn if it never happened? I sort of doubt it. I think new laws will be needed. New resource will be needed. But good luck whoever is going to take that one on and try and even define it in law, let alone even try and enforce it.

At that point, if it’s ‘good enough’ – and people are willing to put up with some pretty fucking poor quality porn – people won’t care that it’s fake. And nor will your friends when you’re trying to convince them that it never happened when they’ve got the evidence right in front of them.

And you can’t put the genie back in the bottle.

 

Discuss?

 

Also, somebody pleeeeeease post this to MumsNet? Because somebody has to think of the children. YEAH I WENT THERE. I SAID CHILDREN. AND PORN.

 

P.S Oh yeah. In a similar vein, people are going to be able to buy custom sex dolls with yer mums face on, too. But that’s probably another discussion for another day.

 

P.P.S. first person to write the described software is an instant multi millionaire. You’re welcome. I have plenty of input and experience, but I really can’t be arsed. Even with the promise of unlimited personalised porn or the lure of architecting the worlds descent into anarchy. You can pay me to consult, though. Or don’t, and I’ll see you when I sue you, which frankly requires far less effort from me with far higher potential reward.

 

#revengeporn #girlfriendporn #celebrityporn #notfappening #sexvideos #otherclickbaithashtags #nobutseriouslytho #sorrynotsorry

Share this shit:

How To Sabotage Any Business Using a Google Feature

There’s no denying that Google is basically the most powerful presence on the internet today. There’s also no denying that they’re arrogant fucktards who do not give a flying fuck about their customers.

On Google Maps, any cunt and his dog can upload a picture of said cunt and his dog – logged against YOUR VERIFIED GOOGLE BUSINESS LISTING. So that when someone searches for your business, it comes up right there, associated with your business.

And guess what? There is absolutely no mechanism to remove them, as the verified owner. You can report them as inappropriate or unrelated… and your report will be completely ignored.

Imagine the implications of this feature? Oh, how you could utterly fuck with any business anywhere, with Google as facilitators!

Why not find a local photographer and upload some utterly shitty blurry photos to his business listing! People will assume he took them and boom! There goes his business! lol

Why not upload some pictures of overflowing garbage cans and some rats to a local restaurants business listing? lol!

The possibilities are endless! Have fun! See how many businesses you can ruin in your area!

 

Oh, and don’t forget to share this with your friends, so they can join in!

Share this shit:

The Most Depressing Thing In All This…

Nothing like a terrorist attack to find out that all your ‘friends’ are irrational hate filled dickheads. Hint: You cannot ’round them all up and deport them’ if they were bloody born here and are legally British citizens. Where, pray tell, would you deport them to?

And if you’re going to deport extremists, doesn’t that include yourselves, you rabid lunatic hate mongering fanatical EDL loving fuckwits? Which country would you like to be deported to?

I’m being careful not to label people as ‘racist’ or ‘xenophobic’ because in their minds that means your argument is null and void because ‘Islam isn’t a race!’ and ‘they weren’t even foreigners!’ (which kinda makes my point that you can’t fucking deport them!).

Share this shit:

Why are people even surprised?

The latest crop of reports on the London Bridge incident centre around police uncovering videos by one of the suspects on ‘how to plot a van and knife attack’, and boasting about how he radicalised more than a dozen students ready to martyr themselves. People are questioning how this sort of material even gets on Youtube? It’s disgusting! Shouldn’t be allowed!

Well it’s really quite simple:

Step 1: Make a video.

Step 2: Upload to Youtube.

The only time Youtube might care is if he was radicalising students or planning terrorist attacks to a background of copyright music…

But seriously, Googles figures show that 400 hours of video is uploaded to Youtube every minute. How, exactly, does anyone expect Youtube to vet 65 YEARS worth of video per day? (Figures quoted are from 2015… it’s probably a whole heck of a lot more now!)

Share this shit:

London Bridge: What Are They Not Telling Us?

Having watched and read pieces from just about every channel and media outlet related to Saturdays attack at London Bridge and Borough Market, it seems to me that there’s a whole heck of a lot that doesn’t add up about this latest terrorist incident… although nobody else seems to have noticed.

I realise that witnesses are inherently unreliable and pretty much make up their own reality; that’s been proven beyond doubt. I am sure that they think they are telling the truth. Apart from that obnoxious ‘geezer’ they’ve been dragging up on all the news reports who seems desperate to make the world believe he’s some kind of hero (Hint: heros are invariably the ones who just dismiss their actions by saying ‘I was just doing what anyone else would do’ while doing something extraordinary that is the polar opposite of what anyone else would do).

The thing that concerns me is the way that all the media outlets are just regurgitating verbatim the timeline and nature of the events pieced together from these eye witness reports in such a matter of fact way, when actually doing so raises a lot of questions that nobody seems to be asking, let alone answering.

For a start, several reports claim ‘three suspects jumped out of the back door’. Considering that people who had narrowly avoided being mown down by the van stated that there were three men in the front seat who exited after crashing it, that doesn’t even seem to make sense. Video footage taken seconds after the van came to a halt shows both front doors open as well as both back doors open. So exactly many people really got out of that van? Who exited front, and who exited back?

Several reports tell of a man in a red tracksuit ‘calmly stabbing people’. No mention whatsoever of a suicide vest, fake or otherwise – just a man in a tracksuit. You would think that if they could describe his clothing, the first thing they’d say is that he was wearing a vest or belt made of weird ass canisters, which apparently all three suspects that were shot were wearing. As evidenced in lots of other witness quotes; ‘I can’t remember anything more about what they were wearing. I saw these kind of bombs. That was the only thing that caught my attention.’

Pictures of all three suspects lying shot on the ground show that none of them were wearing a red tracksuit. So, uh, who was mr stabby red tracksuit guy? Why hasn’t more been made of this?

Witnesses heard – and news programs reported – that two of the three were killed with six shots from police; ‘‘They were all shot dead in a matter of seconds, bang, bang, bang.’ amid plenty of people calling what they saw ‘precise’ and ‘professional’. Conversely, it’s also reported that eight officers fired an ‘unprecedented’ hail of 50 rounds. Sometimes in the very same somewhat schizophrenic headlines… ‘I saw three jihadis shot dead – bang, bang, bang’: Dramatic pictures taken by eyewitness who was just yards away capture moment eight police cut down terrorists in a hail of 50 bullets’ (Daily Mail, obvs).

So was it a nice clean precision ‘bang, bang, bang’, or were three men cut down by eight armed policemen firing apparently indiscriminately (which seems fair to say, given a bystander was apparently shot in the head…)

At least two sets of eyewitness statements that were featured in bulletins and articles stated that shooting had started 10 minutes BEFORE the incident on London Bridge started. But again, rather than questioning it, the news just reported it.

I can’t help thinking that there’s either a LOT more to this incident than the official version that we’re being told, including an exchange of gunfire prior to the van incident even happening, possibly more suspects than we’re being told, and how they were taken out.

And whether I’m right or wrong, why are we getting such apparently conflicting reports with no one really questioning why that should be?

Or could it just be that everyone in the media is just tripping over themselves to spew as much wordage about the incident as they can without any fact checking (or indeed spell checking) or any thought about what they’re actually saying?

What I really hate is how news media no longer seem to stand by their reporting any more; I’d have cited several of the articles I’m drawing from here as evidence of the many apparent inconsistencies I’m highlighting… if only those articles even existed any more.

Share this shit: