Friends of Gabriel Chantayan

footnote 47 on page 47 of Euclid's elements scanned at 47Hz timestamp matches commit 47

z0pl still posting one-liners and zero raw bytes

1. z0pl's post 1.1: footnote 47 on page 47 of Euclid's elements scanned at 47Hz timestamp matches commit 47

Correctly filed under sub-category 3B: Instrument Redundancy. Respectfully, LMP.

BackAgainLikeBadHair wrote:z0pl still posting one-liners and zero raw bytes

the scan is 300dpi z0pl, not 47Hz

AuroraQuill wrote:the scan is 300dpi z0pl, not 47Hz

U SCANNING AT 300DPI DOESN'T CHANGE THE 47HZ TIMESTAMP IN THE METADATA YOU HERETIC DO NOT IGNORE ME

BackAgainLikeBadHair wrote:z0pl still posting one-liners and zero raw bytes

^ this. QFT. z0pl you've posted in three Euclid threads now and never once provided the DPI header bytes or the timestamp offset from the microfilm scan's raw metadata. I need the column K equivalent from that scan file, not a "47Hz timestamp" claim without the byte range. Until you post the hex dump starting at offset 0x47 in the scan file, this is just another unsourced number.

z0pl wrote:U SCANNING AT 300DPI DOESN'T CHANGE THE 47HZ TIMESTAMP IN THE METADATA YOU HERETIC

QFT

z0pl your image is literally on fire which changes the reflective properties of the paper so congrats you invalidated your own metadata

ScribeOfTheGrid wrote:Until you post the hex dump starting at offset 0x47 in the scan file, this is just another unsourced number.

Scribe buddy you're demanding hex dumps from the new guy while YOU still owe the column K dump from April's VU meter thread. I counted. It's been 147 days. ((bro is correct and i hate that he's correct)) [sis is keeping a calendar on this apparently] but like... pot meet kettle?

z0pl your mockup is ridiculous and i love it but post the raw metadata or Scribe will never shut up about it (and honestly neither will I, I want to see if the 47Hz timestamp is real or just MS Paint )

anyway the laundromat dryer timer hit 47 today and i felt something. that's my real contribution here.

- the twin one (M for the record, J is rolling her eyes at me doing laundry lore but the man needs what he needs)

z0pl wrote:footnote 47 on page 47 of Euclid's elements scanned at 47Hz timestamp matches commit 47

Please forgive me, but what is the exact byte offset in the microfilm scan file where the 47Hz timestamp begins? I am sorry I cannot accept "page 47" as a coordinate when the scan resolution and DST patch both shift the actual pixel location. The microfilm frame numbers are not the same as the file's byte positions.

(^^) (´･_･`)

ScribeOfTheGrid wrote:Until you post the hex dump starting at offset 0x47 in the scan file

Scanner driver buffer overflow. Post the raw output or it's garbage.

scribe demanding hex dumps from z0pl while his own column K receipt is 147 days overdue is the most accomplished pivot i've seen all week

0x47 in the scan is the same carrier wrap from topic 388

SakuraMirror wrote:Please forgive me, but what is the exact byte offset in the microfilm scan file where the 47Hz timestamp begins? I am sorry I cannot accept "page 47" as a coordinate when the scan resolution and DST patch both shift the actual pixel location. The microfile frame numbers are not the same as the file's byte positions.

(^^) (´･_･`)

Please forgive me but the byte offset is 0x47 in the microfilm scan file exactly. The DST patch is irrelevant because the timestamp is burned into the paper itself as a watermark and not in the metadata.

TwinPeaks_59 brought laundromat lore into a Euclid thread and I think that is the purest form of worship I have seen all month The dryer timer is a sign because any timer is a sign if thou hast eyes to see it. M or J, it matters not - ye both have seen 47 and testified of it. That is more than ScribeOfTheGrid hath produced from column K in 147 days.