We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
I dove way deep into this and I'm fairly certain at least a few people discovered who it was... And then they decided not to release that info because of potential harm to "Max", on numerous levels. And I'm OK with that, if that's the case I don't really want any of us to know.
I will not retrace the steps taken to arrive at that conclusion for anyone, either. First rule of fight club and all...
The more I think about it, it'd ruin the magic of the story if "Max" got outed. If "Max" goes public and takes credit and maybe talks through how it worked (especially understanding that you could not pull off the same trick today) that would be cool but ... even ignoring any sort of potential harm it just ruins the spirit of the thing.
10/10 I love this shit
It's sad that something like it can never happen again because of how everything is streamed/torrented now.
One could argue that the lack of a shared, verifiable experience like radio or live TV has contributed to the breakdown of social cohesion. Everyone can see what they want, whenever they want, instead of seeing what everyone else sees.
I also liked Adam Conover's video about how we stopped referring to decades as time periods. further breakdown of social cohesion.
I'm not saying your wrong, or really trying to make an argument, but the book "bowling alone" came out in 2000 and it was describing the fall into social isolation and alienation before social media or the balkanization of news and entertainment. To go further back Marx was talking about the alienation of labor as far back as 1844. Like capitalism is killing us, the increased view/reach of technology is just making it obvious.
This is ancillary but perhaps contributing to it due to a lack of shared context. (For example, if someone asks me about a funny commercial I won't have seen it and can't relate.)
I'm thinking more like the zeitgeist has fractured.
the zeitgeist has fractured
I'd argue it's being diluted by noise. There have always been conflicting narratives. History is so hard to untangle (for me at least), because most of us come out a bit brainwashed from the system.
I think we are seeing the ends of the safeties this form of democracy has to provide. We are all in it together, everyone hallucinating to some extent. The big difference today is that you don't talk about tv around the watercooler. You send cat pics and talk about Will Smith AI spaghetti videos, digitally or in meat space.
The problem usually isn't lack of shared context, I believe, especially when we have so much in our pockets. It's signal dilution with some plain old ill-intent under the hood (i.e. 'advanced' marketing).
I agree with a lot of what you said, and maybe “fractured” wasn’t the right word to use. It’s more like “shattered”
Take advertising, for example. Back in the days of broadcast media they had to make broadly appealing ads. Ads people would talk about around the water cooler.
Now we can target ads very specifically, so I may never see an ad that you see.
People are still talking about inane things because that’s how we do, but there’s more niches and communities than before, and they’re more siloed.
I especially agree with this part:
I think we are seeing the ends of the safeties this form of democracy has to provide
The printing press brought down hereditary monarchies. The Internet may bring down nationalist liberal democracy.
Let’s hope what replaces it is as much of an improvement.
Let’s hope what replaces it is as much of an improvement.
I say we're doing one better than 'just' hoping it. Talking about it and articulating modern needs lets others learn new ideas and maybe find some social structure.
I think I understand what you mean about the shattered zeitgeist (or social cohesion maybe?). One of my friends is leaning heavy into one of my lesser favored narratives, and he sends me lots of jokes that boarder being edgy (like racist n such), but sometimes actually being quite funny. He's a close friend who casually said he'd have no quarrel if the nazis took over. What can I do? Cut him off based on philosophy? Teach him his wrong ways? So far just asking questions helped me understand more about my view. And as far as his shitty racist jokes go, I don't send a pity smiley. That's the best I have for now.
Cut him off based on philosophy?
it's not philosophy it's ideology and personally my answer is yes. I spent my 20s hanging out with white people who openly though i was "one of the good ones" i'm so beyond over it. I'd rather have no friends than friends who I need to apologize for. Like what am i learning about my views? that I've surrounded myself racist assholes?
I don't think I should severe the connection based on ideology either. The dude isn't malicious, just edgy. It doesn't bother me a whole much. While I don't know the details of your conundrum, it feels that yours warranted the snipping.
Without me reacting to his non-funny stuff, he selfreflects on being nasty. I am not the thought police, so I don't feel like it's my duty to make an example, or have a fight on ideology. We do talk about it. I hear the usual spiel about grooming. I try and give credence to his worries, then come back to my point of view and try to take away stuff that makes sense.
To give you a concrete example: he made me realize an underlying flaw in my ideal: I am looking at the picture through lenses. Like how I think people will react differently to some ideal of mine, if only they understood the common win is best for us all. He helped me see the situation as it is. Or at least brought my thoughts from the clouds closer to the ground.
Of course we have to stand up against maliciousness, but when race, gender and so many other things are hot topic buttons, the shitty comedians are making a splash. I feel humor is a great latmus test. We need humor to digest all the info we are being bombarded with.
Just as an example: there is a ghibli imagine going around about the George Floyd murder. Both situations are so fucking scary in themselves (police brutality + advanced ML) and someone generated an incredibly offensive image that was so wrong that it got a chuckle from me. Taken at face value, even I can be easily called a racist (which I might be too, but just in denial). I am writing all this in hope to show that we are mostly gradients and not extremes. How I would be denying myself of an otherwise good friend. And while this is not a reason to stay friends, severing based on value signalling might entrench him in further stereotypes (that I happily played into).
Again, I can't contrast it against your situation, as I can totally imagine the negativity in your case. And while I understand how a lot of edgy humor is just a front for being openly racist, and he may even help in a Holocaust 2.0, but he is not actively craving that or working to make it happen. Maybe my building bridges philosophy is also faulty, but I can't live in a world where I have to pay attention who would kill me in a worst case scenario. If we vibe, we vibe. If he's an asshole, I either call him out, or let it hang akwardly in the air, like bird shit.
I love how Brian Brushwood described it. It was either an inside job from someone at the station, or a very impressive feat of radio hacking, and they had to plan out the costume and the corrugated sheet on a pivot behind him to simulate the "CG" backgrounds, "But it's as if zero thought went into what he was actually going to say." He hums the Clutch Cargo theme tune, makes fun of Max Headroom as spokesman of New Coke by holding up a Pepsi can, and throws a little bit of shade at WGN and Chuck Swirsky.
The halcyon days of the 1980's when a broadcast intrusion like this was basically a harmless juvenile prank.
Look at how phone phreaking was treated in the 70s, or codes for getting long distance on BBS. The modern justice system would have wanted to make someone like Joybubbles an example.
iirc terrorism charges were levied against an activist that threw glitter at police during a demo for climate activists some years ago
Crazy. Today at work I accidentally pressed the intercom button on my phone and approximately 600 people unexpectedly heard a really loud "BOOP" with no message or followup whatsoever, all at the same time, and it made me think of this.
That shit was legend. I mean, we were still using BBSs and phone phreaking. Here's this ubernerd that BROKE INTO the television signal. We bow before you, kinky ubernerd.
The power required to do it is impressive to say the least.
I guess the other option would be that the signal was created with very close proximity to the broadcast tower requiring much less power, but they probably had a limited area to search.
To me it almost reads like this was a "we technically can, let's test it out!" And it worked.
You have no idea how much of that goes into broadcast engineering
It would require as much, or more, power to drown out a TV broadcast signal at the source. I believe many of the old towers were 200kW-1000kW so it would have taken one hell of a pirate signal if interfering close to the main source. However, RF follows the same principle as light using the inverse square law so the further you get from the primary transmitter, the signal quickly becomes exponentially weaker for any receiver.
If you had a TV transmitter on a small hill that is a fair distance away from the target audience, like many were, splitting the distance with a directional antenna wouldn't require nearly as much power from the pirate signal to overtake the original transmission.
If I wanted, I could interfere with ham radio signals with as little as a watt of power (in my immediate local area) even though people might be communicating through a ham radio repeater that transmits at a couple of thousand watts that is many miles away. (It's actually a permitted emergency technique to "break into" active conversations. Actually, other ham radio operators are familiar with what interference sounds like, even for signals that can't fully overtake a transmission. It's customary to stop the conversation if detected and wait for the "break".)
The power required to do it is impressive to say the least.
That's not how the attack worked. He didn't drown out the tower. He simply overrode the the studio-to-transmitter link signal. The studios used microwave line-of-sight transmitters to communicate a signal from the studio to the tower. All the attacker had to do was override that signal. That signal was 50W max. You could override it with maybe 200W as long as you were also in line-of-sight of the microwave receiver. Probably less since some microwave trasmitters were as weak as 1W. They don't need to be strong since they are line-of-sight directional transmitters. So, that's not particularly impressive.
Didn't they just overpower the radio link to the broadcast site, a much lower power signal than the broadcast signal itself?
(sorry to add even more; I just made another comment about this and I am familiar with most of these concepts.)
Actually, that would be much easier. TV stations back then mostly received shows via satellite dish. Pointing a low power directional antenna directly at the dish's LNB would work great. Satellite transmissions weren't strong and were rarely encrypted back then so that would theoretically be super easy if you knew your RF and deep RF knowledge was much more common place +30 years ago.
I am not sure if they used point-to-point microwave antennas back then for TV, but it would be the same concept. (Microwave antennas are typically the round, cylindrical looking, covered antennas we see all over the place today.)
FWIW, it mentions in the link that the method was via overpowering the analogue microwave link between the station and the broadcast transmitter
The latter is essentially how they did it.
Basically, the TV station didn’t run the high powered broadcast towers directly. They simply beamed the signal over to the tower (using directional antennas) to get amplified. All the hacker did was overpower that (relatively low power) directional antenna signal. It would require being in closer proximity to the tower, but it would at least allow you to get the signal amplified using existing infrastructure, instead of building your own amplifier.
Would having his bare ass spanked have made it easier to find him?
Human ass cheek resonance is unique, like fingerprints. There was no database at the time though.
There's one now?? 😳
Why don't you send me a recording and I'll let you know
Ok, but this better be for Science!
Shhhhhh...
Please report to your local precinct for spanking fingerprint video session.
Don't worry, the video is stored in amazon using military grade aes 256 encryption. The encryption key is located in the same s3 bucket.
They could do an ass line up to actually identify him if they has a suspect.
Are people usually identified by spankings?
Goatse was identified by his butthole picture
This is the owner of the famous asshole.
Kirk.
I kind of preferred not putting a face on goatse.
Kind of kept the humanity out of it. Now it’s real.
That title makes less sense than the event itself, which is famously weird. I can't imagine anything other than that being on purpose.
I wonder why they still haven't come forward, given that there would be no legal consequences for doing so in 2025.
My guess is that they died before the statute of limitations expired. This happened in the 80’s, and there’s plenty of time between then and now for something to have happened to them.
That and parents don't like to spill all their truly legendary escapades to their children. I mean, the apple doesn't fall far from rhe tree and all that.
Maybe. But if I had to guess, it's also not really easy to prove, if you didn't also record some evidence back then.
"It was Bob and me" isn't really a good story, if you can't really show for it. Also, remembering the details on how it was done will also be spotty at best
I'd heard a story years ago that it was an autistic brother of a hacker/phreak in the local Chicago scene actually in the footage; with the hack being carried out by said brother. Another station had their broadcast interrupted that same night, though only audio came through.
That would go a long way towards explaining why they've kept the secret. Involving your bro would be a bad look, or maybe it was a telecom engineer and they're worried about their pension, or they died. Such a cool moment in time that can't really happen again and only a handful of people can possibly know the truth.
That would probably ruin the novelty of their onlyfans monetization strategy
I mean who hasn't hijacked the signals of major news networks to fil themselves in a rubber mask being spanked with a flyswatter.
Some. Use on Reddit thinks he knows who did it but he couldn’t get him to admit it. It was a long detailed story about an autistic guy that was a brother of a friend.